LONG Closing Arguments — Has the State Proven Their Case Against David Prevatte?

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: please note that this content is for adults only viewer discretion advised if you haven't yet hit the subscribe like and share hello everyone and welcome back to another live stream with me gizela k this is grizzly true crime and we are here to recap day seven of the david provide trial happening in north carolina and we're going to watch the live closing arguments together and then after that we're going to teleport to our other the live trial that we're actually covering this one i haven't covered gavel to gavel live but i did a day one and two summary for you and then i made a video of a summary of day three four five and six for you and today i was going to make a video of i was actually busy making it a day seven summary and i'm like why would i do that why don't we just cover why don't we just talk about it together on a live stream and then we watch the closing arguments together because it's perfect timing we'll teleport right after this to our other trial because the you know closing arguments here will happen apparently during instructions and closing arguments at 9 30 eastern so that's great we've got some time to recap day seven and if you missed the case entirely don't worry uh also if you're wondering do i sleep everyone asks me do you sleep how do you cover this apparently not apparently not so much okay i do drink a lot of coffee though thank you for all the coffees everyone really appreciate it's you i blame you you keep me awake okay because you buy me coffees but keep doing it so that i can keep making you content right and follow try to follow two two three trials at once apparently that's what i'm doing in the second half of 2026 anyway so peyton fields is the victim in this case and uh she was rushed to the hospital on november 13th of 2017 so shame it was her sister savannah who was in sleeping in the living room with her and she saw her and said like her eyes were rolling back and it looked like something was really wrong with her so she went to go wake her grandparents and the grandparents are like no man go back to sleep but when the grandparents got up early then they saw something is really wrong with peyton they called 911 and then david provide the guy on trial the uncle of peyton and peyton's grandfather rushed uh her to hospital she died four days later shame and so david provate um by the way again november 13th of 2017 he was arrested february 4th of 2022 it's like another north carolina case it took a while hey oh my word uh southern cali b said another busy court day grizzlies thanks for all you do g and mods thank you so much for your super sticker so i'm first going to recap for you day seven of course i've got time stamps to show you as well from day seven let me actually just start with that because you got this is why i got so excited to make this video today as tired as i was this morning i i don't care i was ready i was ready you know why uncle google's gone get you when i heard about the google searches i'm like oh now we're talking oh now we're talking now they never found apparently david provides phone from 2017 but he apparently used other people's laptops and phones and so they searched their laptops and phones and they found things so let me show you that quickly from day seven hold on one second we'll do this okay so this is him david privatt 27 years old now he was 19 years old at the time of the crime the alleged crime he's accused of the first degree murder of peyton fields and he's accused of a s offense against a child by an adult they have dropped count two which was r-a-p-e charge the judge said the state didn't prove that that charge and so he dropped it at the defense's request okay so this is the part of day seven where they talk about the google searches on one of david's friends phones listen to what he googled allegedly here when you reviewed states [00:04:11] Speaker 2: that they were 118 which were google records of uh haley falsett did you find any items of interest on those google records yes and what did you find so in would you like me to read them all out sir [00:04:29] Speaker 3: november the 28 2017 it appeared this account search pender mugshots um search pender county deputies investigate five-year-old dies from assault there was five additional searches that same day on november the 28 2017 they searched it appears to be facts dot com but it's did you know facts dot com happens dash murder dash happens takes place that was searched two times on the 28 2017 um if a murder happens in a home does the house have to be taped off that was searched three times november the 16th 2017 how long does it take dna tests to see if one matches another dna that search was conducted four times november the 16th 2017 there was a wct story uh i apologize let me back up wct dot com slash story slash 1467 1895 slash burghall police department november 16 2017 um wct burghall was searched again november the 3rd 2017 was a pornography video and okay so that's what they talked about right now a [00:05:54] Speaker 1: virtual tour said they didn't drop it the judge dismissed it with prejudice that that's the legalese i was talking just like the peanut gallery i am thank you so much for your comment can i just get it right i made a youtube short and i'm like oh my word they dropped that essay charges and then someone was like no no just count to it i'm like oh okay delete that short next and this was at one o'clock in the morning in switzerland when i'm supposed to be quiet and i'm like okay i'm in the living room all right my makeup my lipstick was all smeared already whatever and then i'm like because i was snacking after the trial you know what i mean anyway so then i'm like okay i'm gonna refilm the short then i refilm it then people like your lipstick looks funny your lighting doesn't look right that filter doesn't do you justice i'm like filter i don't have a filter on uh someone thank you for the five spicy lattes point being this is a side rant of i'm trying to get it right i appreciate your comment they didn't drop it the judge dismissed count two with prejudice did i finally get it right is my lipstick okay does my filter look right am i good okay so he's facing first degree murder and a child is an s offense i'm censoring for youtube as much as i can um of a child by an adult that's what the jury will deliberate on all right now now let's quickly i've got more time stamps to show you from this day i'm just going to leave me on on in the background for a second while i tell you what happened on day seven okay ready all right so of course the day opened with dna this was yesterday right today they're going to do closing arguments the day opened with dna testimony from a private lab and then moved to the investigator who took over the case years later he walked the jury through the digital evidence he obtained and the physical items that he re-examined like those red earbuds that we've spoken about before the state rested the judge dismissed the statutory r-a-p-e charge and the defense rested without calling any witnesses so he did not testify people were wondering as well is he going to take the stand is he not no he chose not to he actually said and we'll look at the time stamp later where he's like nah i'm not gonna i'm not gonna testify because i think he did a pretty good job all right so let's go over what the bode technology dna analyst lindsey saney said saney is a senior dna analyst at bode a private forensic lab in 2021 bode received extracts from the north carolina state crime lab and they'd already generated those extracts from and i'm generalizing by saying genital swabs because trigger warning everybody if i have to hear clitoral hood one more time or vaginal opening shame in this case involving a five-year-old little girl i can't i can't it's a lie it's a lie so i'm just going to say genital area for for now okay so um again bode received the extracts from the north carolina state crime lab that they'd already created from genital swabs plus leftover cotton from those same swabs that the state lab had not fully consumed the state asked bode to do a y str testing which looks only for male dna on the y chromosome so on the leftover cotton from the genital area of the victim bode found no male dna at all and i'm like oh my word here we go again the dna evidence it's a little it's a little weak anyway so then on on the state lab extract from the genital swab area there was a very small amount of male dna it was 0.002 nanograms per microliter that quantity was too low to produce any y str profile on the state lab extract from an ear swab there was also a very small amount of male dna bode got a partial y str mixture of at least two people but the data was too limited to draw any conclusions or make any comparisons i'm like okay so we got nothing from this all right so then dna analyst saney said the low amounts made the negative results on the leftover swab cotton unsurprising no usable male profile that could be compared to anyone came from the genital extracts her report in full case file were admitted so then investigator eric short did i suppose name right i actually think it's with a c is it i think it's with a c hold on detective eric short testified and in fact we've already seen a bit of that clip now so i could take that off day seven summary that's what we're doing thank you so much for being here linda bear said in my opinion is so guilty if you've been watching the trial uh i know trial tv live has been covering it every day i've been watching between them and sometimes on law and crime when i just want to i can speed up trial tv live i'm just saying i switch between the two and sometimes i speed it up like when i go on my walks i'm like all right here we go 1.5 1.5 speed here we go okay so what is the saying lost my train of thought point is watching there if you've been watching the whole trial tell me and maybe we could do a poll when i'm done with the summary do you think he's going to be found guilty or no do you think the state proved their case or no hmm okay so investigator eric short uh took the stand detective eric short previously worked criminal investigations at the pender county sheriff's office he was assigned the case after the original detective detective leatherwood is that correct leatherwood leatherfield leatherwood that detective he also testified that was in my day three four five six summary anyway that original detective retired so this detective eric short took over the case right he resubmitted standards for more sensitive dna testing that became available later like hello technology and reviewed the physical evidence himself on the red earbuds very important to the case as we keep saying he measured them with digital calipers a single conductor so you know like earbuds with the wire the wired ones the old school ones which are actually good huh do you still use them or what i mean i use mostly these or the ones in your ear or whatever i use shocks but i like those as well the ones you could just plug into your phone anyway now these days phones don't have those there are holes anymore for it come on man i used to like those but never mind point being he measured them with digital calibers a single conductor so one of the like wire was about zero point one five inches and the two conductors side by side measured about 0.206 inch both smaller than a quarter inch and the total length was 51 inches bratty bath loves thank you for the five spicy lattes you guys do want me to stay awake don't you leather wood okay cool did i say that i was like a little leather field leather wood thank you leather wood i've got leather field i made leather wood retired detective okay he observed stretching and rippling of the sheath and at least two knots and this is important as to the marks they were ligature marks on the victim the five-year-old peyton fields and so they think that she was strangled using the red earbuds so that's why there's a big issue with the red earbuds and they're trying to find well what caused the ligature marks right and it was actually the parents of this defendant and the grandmother and grandfather of peyton that said no no they don't believe that this was a murder and essay like no way so maybe she just got caught up like in the blinds you know in the courts there or maybe i don't know they came up with all reasons all these reasons but champ the detectives were like oh no there's there's a lot of evidence that she was strangled yeah okay so they wanted to know with what so then he testified in his opinion the earbuds were the only item in custody whose loop matched the ligature impression on peyton's neck he later spoke with a medical examiner who agreed the cord was consistent with the injury wow he also examined the belt sees from hayley fawcett believed to be david provides belt now hayley fawcett is the same lady whose phone they got those google searches from which i'm going to go over one more time here the belt was too wide to match the narrow band of intact skin the medical examiner had documented on peyton's neck so they really think it was these red earbuds now the problem that i have with it is they never tested the the part that goes in your ear they tested only the cord and the reason that's important to the defense let's say is because they could prove then if they tested all of it well if peyton's dna was on the ear part then she would have used them because the ear buds were found in david provat's room that room was previously peyton and savannah's room when david had a fight with his girlfriend broke up with her and moved back into his mama's house the two little girls were sleeping on the couch he was sleeping in the room which i still every video i know i said every video i think that's really unfair he should have slept on the couch yana anyway so to me it's like okay but her dna could be on it she could have used it she could have touched it there's all sorts of ways one could um offer a defense against the evidence the state has yet to me this is no definitely not a slam dunk and it's big time circumstantial evidence and the dna evidence is not strong at all but somebody did something to peyton and that's where common sense is is is is gonna come in for the jury you know why because it's like okay there was the grandfather and the grandmother five people in the house that night david so two adult males all right who did it and they're looking at this guy based on the evidence on his box of shorts on he was carrying her to the hospital so the defense can explain that away too anyway the the red earbuds are like critical because they were in the room and all of that and savannah saw david provide standing over the couch like looking over the couch when she woke up and then she looked at peyton and saw something's very wrong with her sister and went to go away the grandparents right okay so i'm trying not to talk too slowly here i'm trying to talk fast actually a little bit i hope it's not too fast for you because at you know on at half past whatever time is for you in the world for me it's half past three up past nine eastern is when they're coming back you know this morning for jury instructions and closing arguments and we've got to get to it because we have another trial to get to right after that okay and we don't have to pack our bags too much because we're staying in north carolina today okay so um right he this detective eric short he issued google warrants for five accounts connected to the people in the household including lisa hunt dale hunt and then hayley fawcett google returns include contacts photos my activity search history uncle google's go get ya so on dale hunt and lisa hunts accounts he found nothing of interest now remember peyton was rushed to the hospital on november 13th of 2017. on november 16th of 2017 a wct burger or burger police department story was googled on hayley's phone then on november 16th same day three days after the peyton died four days after being rushed to hospital so it was during the time she was on life supported hospital um the state alleges that david provided googled how long does it take dna tests to see if one matches another dna he googled that four times that day then on november 28th of 2017 pender mugshots pender county deputies investigate five-year-old dies from assault that is so specific and five more searches that day okay so that was all on hayley fawcett's account which again i'm going to say oh wow you got to really stack obviously all the circumstantial evidence because of course the defense will be like you don't know who made those searches right now lisa okay you don't have to shout in all caps but you said not one of you can show one ounce i don't know i'm not sure who you're shouting it you are welcome here all opinions are welcome here if you watched any coverage of my any of my coverage of this case particularly the video that i i think i uploaded it yesterday for you guys yeah actually it was late on sunday night i was really incredibly unsure of this case i'm like they're not going to be able to convict this guy no i don't i don't know but the thing is now they've added some google searches but i i think the evidence is weak i think it's weak in my opinion i'm worried i'm not like oh yeah okay cool i'm just like oh you got some google results but i mean it's very specific so why would hayley be googling that i don't know i feel like he he would be googling um pender county deputies investigate five-year-old dies from assault that's not what they said from assault wow and also he had threatened the lead detective and he got a like a witness intimidation charge before he was arrested in 2022 and charged with the murder of patent so yeah okay so thank you mods for whatever the heck is what is going on in chat here oh my word okay so if you're new here tone is important okay watch your tone be nice to each other all opinions are welcome attack the evidence not the character of people and don't fight with each other all right so detective short said that he sought um hayley fawcett's records because the file indicated that she and david provide were not together that night but that david often used the phones of people close to him and in fact there was a friend that testified on one of the days i think her name was melinda the other melissa melinda and she said that david had used her laptop and the detectives therefore took her laptop and tried to see if they could find anything that he had done on there particularly google searches right and she had said that while she knew him since childhood and just told everyone yeah he's my cousin but they weren't actually like biological cousins they were friends from childhood that she said look if you visit my house you can use my stuff but just know you can't look at corn can't look at that stuff in my house okay but turns out he did look at that stuff at her house uh-huh yep but not anything to do with children is what detectives were looking for like is there anything there so facebook warrants for the same group of people produced nothing of interest so there was nothing of interest besides those google searches on hayley's phone from all the laptops and phones that they had tested uh he confirmed the hospital discarded peyton's underwear before police could collect it of course because she lost control of her bells as well so it's not like the hospital did something wrong it was very soiled and so they threw they you know they threw that away um a pink blanket later collected had robert fields and peyton's dna on it and i believe robert fields from what i heard is the biological father of peyton and savannah so all right um other forensic results then on day seven lab analyst melinda wilson testified about additional scene items swabs from the wall behind the couch and from the ends and center of a mini blind cord had dna levels too low to amplify so that came from i think they started looking into that because at some point and correct me if i'm wrong because i haven't watched the i mean i haven't covered the whole trial gather together i've listened to everything but you know sometimes when you listen your mind could drift a little but what i heard was that i think it was the grandmother lisa hunt that came up with this theory of maybe peyton got caught up in the in the cords of the blinds or almost like she did it to herself type thing and i'm like huh oh dear because they just couldn't wrap their minds around their son obviously being accused of what he's being accused of so they went and tested the blinds and the cords um the dna levels were too low to amplify a swab from the couch cushion produced a profile that was inconclusive because of complexity or insufficient quality also the grandmother and grandfather were saying no way man david didn't do this and they said that peyton was very sick she had a fever and she wasn't feeling too well the days leading up to her death and that they think she died because she was sick no they didn't take her to a doctor while she was sick which is a concern which the defense can definitely and have been highlighting right the defense are like huh okay i think the defense attorney has been incredibly professional in this case as well we're seeing quite a few of those maybe it's north carolina is a north carolina thing the defense attorneys are so nice all right so then at the end of the day the state rested i'm going to show you that clip now the defense moved to dismiss all charges the judge denied the dismissal of the first degree murder and statutory s offense charge but dismissed the statutory rape charge the court found the state had shown trauma to all those words that i want to say the genital area but the only evidence offered about penile penetration was an unidentified third dna component on david's penile swab whose sex could not be determined with no dna recovered inside the private parts of the victim that could identify anyone the judge ruled the jury would be left guessing on the required penile element the defense rested without presenting any evidence david provide confirmed he understood his rights and he chose not to testify the parties reviewed the jury instructions and closings were set for the next morning that's us today all right so a quick summary just a quick one of the evidence that we're probably going to hear about now in the closing arguments the summary right so i made my own little summary here okay and then i'm going to show you wait let me show you the clips first because i've got um time stamps for that wait so we're gonna go to 5 25 here somewhere here wait 5 25 and 14 seconds ooh somewhere around here there's a judge okay so this is where the state rests [00:24:20] Speaker 4: state you may call your next witness judge the state rest all right members of the jury this time there are matters that i need to confer with the attorneys about so go ahead and excuse you from the courtroom okay close up your notebooks [00:24:38] Speaker 1: so the state okay so the state is rested they send the jury home and then we're going to watch this clip here from 604 for a few minutes all right from around here okay i quickly want to read you my little summary um of what because i'm like what the hell do they have against the sky after all that right okay so cause of death and injuries the medical examiner testimony established death by ligature strangulation the findings included extensive petechiae on the head and face of the victim abrasions on her neck and a u-shaped mark consistent with the cord of red earbuds acute non-accidental trauma was also described to the genital area yeah okay and um the alleged weapon used was the red earbuds recovered from a table next to david probat's bed investigators and the medical examiner linked the cord to the neck injuries particularly where those wires meet is how i'm visualizing and i hope i'm right with that like where the cords meet it made like a u-shaped pattern somewhere on her neck right so that is why they think it's that the shape the knots the twisting whatever all of that the width everything that they measured and so right um investigators and the medical examiner linked the cord to the neck injuries and both david and payton's dna that was on the earbuds but the defense can explain that away because they both lived there but you know that was on the earbuds and something happened to payton she had ligature marks she had petechiae right okay so who did it if not david who okay anyway so nothing uh was that's not how the jury would be deliberating by the way i'm just asking us so um nothing was nearby that the earbuds could be plugged into either so that's another one then i want to have to discuss with you the penile swab a swab of david's penis taken with consent was pinkish or bloodstain dna analysis showed a three-person mixture none of the profiles matched patent fields david told investigators he recently had sex with his girlfriend while she was menstruating the state had pointed to an unidentified third component on the penile swab as part of its circumstantial argument though the statutory rape charge was later dismissed for insufficient proof of penile penetration west london says it says only subscribers can message so i had to do this for the first time the what does that mean of youtube what is what is that again i don't know can't remember what that means a-i-d-a wait what does it mean i don't know what it means i'm too old i'm showing my age getting old i don't know what what these youngsters are saying i don't know what i mean sorry can someone help me out with that later thank you for being a member for 29 months i'm looking if anyone's answering me all right so genital dna on the victim a very small amount of male dna was detected on the genital area very small amount but was there okay bode technologies y str testing found the quantity too low to develop a usable profile or make any comparison no male dna was found on the remaining swab material as we know so i don't that's not strong evidence no semen was detected on the sa kit or related items either right okay let's just quickly see is someone answering it or not maybe west london can tell me what that means the what of youtube is that like saying goat is that what it means it's like a goat okay um right so then the other evidence we'll hear about in the closing arguments is uh david's dna they identified as a major contributor on certain items boxer shorts the boxer short cuttings phone charger cord whipped cream nozzle and nail scrapings patent's dna found on a white sheet and on the red earbuds and seen swabs yielded dna levels that were too low so that's not going to be much that i don't know how they're going to talk about that in the closing arguments opportunity and circumstances okay so there were two males in the house that we know of the other theory i see on social media is what if someone climbed through the window what if somebody else was there they were the girls were sleeping in the lounge what if somebody came in there i don't know anyway so but but then savannah saw david there by the couch when she had woken up okay i don't think anyone knows what it means either okay so i still see some infighting going on i'm just going to concentrate here then i'm going to switch to the closing arguments okay hold on we're almost done other dna items we went there yeah opportunity and circumstances only a small number of people were in the house that night david among one of them he brought the unconscious child to the hospital this so peyton the state argued the combination of the injuries the earbuds with both parties uh dna in his room and the limited set of people present supports that he was the perpetrator okay did stefan rescue the day there attention oh i did look that up but what attention interest desire and action oh thank you so much stefan all right um so he confirmed the hospital oh no not that i'm back on i'm like he confirmed okay hold on hold on i'm now rushing because i know it's time it's time um we've read through this one all my notes all over the freaking place and time stamps and everything wait opportunity and circumstance timeline and investigation peyton arrived unconscious at the hospital on november 13th of 2017 and she died uh three days later i thought it was four days later but okay pravat was not in my notes right pravat was not arrested until 2022 after extradition from louisiana i feel like they should throw that in there as well why did he go elsewhere years for work he was working in construction but like okay did he want to be further away the state said that he the state said that updated dna retesting and analysis of those earbuds provided what they needed for the indictment okay so that's where we are now i've got to show you this quickly okay okay and then we'll switch to the live stream judge quickly tell us all right with regard to [00:31:07] Speaker 4: defendants motion to dismiss the state is alleging three charges the first being first degree murder the second statutory rape of a child by an adult [00:31:19] Speaker 1: and the third you know what we already told you that the judge dismissed to count two so we don't have to hear all these horrible words again i want to show you where this [00:31:28] Speaker 4: guy and has indicated that he would not testify that's correct all right mr probat if you could please stand so the defense rest mr probat you understand that you have a constitutional right to remain silent you understand that all right and you understand that that constitutional right remains with you throughout this trial and if you understand that if you wish to exercise your right to remain silent i would instruct the jury that they could not use that silence against you yes sir and do you understand that you also have the right to testify if you wanted to testify you understand that yes sir and that you could give up your right to remain silent you can take the stand and testify if you wanted to understand and that whether to testify or not testify are choices that you and you alone can make do you understand that now your attorney has indicated that you do not wish to testify is that accurate yes i did not wish because he did pretty good okay all right so another i did not wish to because he did pretty good oh my word words the choice that you're making not to testify is your choice and yours alone and it is not the choice of your attorney yes and you're making that decision not to testify knowingly intelligently and voluntarily yes all right thank you so you can have a seat [00:32:50] Speaker 1: so let's switch to the live stream how about that you saw that now that's pretty much everything i wanted to show you um and kerman said thank you g for the or for the summary g that's my pleasure sorry if i spoke a bit fast i just we got to get through it we got to go to the live stream now i hope it helps that was a summary of day seven okay you don't have to watch it whatever eight hours of it summarize it for you quickly because we're not able to cover the two trials gathered together right now horns for hopes that grandma said wasn't it the grandpa wasn't it dale that said that um there was a leash used by the girl so he actually said that savannah was uh punished that night because earlier she had like she had like a leash a dog leash that she had put on peyton's neck and she was dragging around with it yeah so but i don't think they recovered any of the leashes from the home i also heard that and i'm like huh why is the grandpa mentioning dog leashes when there are no dog leashes in the house that is freaking red flag so if not um my my if it isn't uh david i wonder who else it could be sorry but i just i'm not blaming him i'm just like you know sir why are you saying that you know anyway okay let me boost the sound of the live stream let me bring it up for you are you ready now to watch live day seven let's put it from here this guy's always smiling this is why i started covering the case because you guys all blew up my inbox if that's the right thing you are blowing up my inbox like gee you got it covered you know you knew i would snark at this guy his demeanor dude like you know you're on trial for first degree murder right of a little girl yeah your niece and essay um okay so him smiling and blowing kisses and like looking at the camera wow it's been a lot it's been a lot right okay let's just see what you guys are saying jl man said i feel like he doesn't need to take the stand he has nothing to prove now what i will do is i'll make a poll of whether you think the state has proven their case i'm going to quickly go forward here to where they're actually live live oh this guy judge hello sir sound anyway see i've hit brands hey somewhere here somewhere here somewhere here [00:35:24] Speaker 4: all right did both of you have an opportunity to review the jury instructions again state any corrections yes mr brit all right there was one correction that i had on page nine the very end of the first degree murder instruction it read something to the effect of if you do not so find then you wouldn't find first degree murder but there wasn't any indication as to not guilty so i've changed it to if you do not so find or have a reasonable doubt as to one or more of these things it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty do you see that yes okay it did make some other minor tweaks sorry judge no disrespect we're just gonna go forward okay [00:36:35] Speaker 1: let's bring the jury what's happening bring the jury everybody stand um my poll says what do you think the verdict should be guilty on all counts which is first degree murder and a s offense against a child by an adult those are the two counts right so is it guilty on all counts when i say guilty on some not on others you can expand on your answer in the chat like say i think guilty of murder but not the other one or guilty of the other one but not the murder you know what i mean or not guilty on all counts based on what you've seen the case present [00:37:15] Speaker 4: okay judge what is happening now let's see this is and then in the final instruction form i plural i pluralized the word forms all right anything with regard to the verdict forms themselves any objections state no mr grit [00:37:50] Speaker 1: that is a good clarification mindy according to the evidence what do you think the verdict should be it's your email address according to the evidence that you have heard basically what would you vote right based on the evidence not a feeling not an hunch based on the evidence right let's see what you guys are saying 53 percent say 54 percent now say guilty on all counts 27 percent said guilty on some not on others and 20 percent say not guilty on all counts and braun said he will walk milan cool ja said guilty two copies or one copy oh somebody says a high probability of a hung jury could be as well hey oh my can you imagine after all this time from 2017. thank you want to put the mod coffee link in the chat they're working so hard out here maybe they need some more coffees you guys if somebody would be willing to buy them some they're doing double trial time today i just went back because i don't know what they're doing is there anything we need to [00:39:05] Speaker 4: discuss on behalf of the state yeah behalf of the defense no all right you're ready for your opening argument or your closing argument yes all right mr brit you're ready as well yes sir as far as when they're done is there anything that you need to do to set up or anything like that no sir okay [00:39:35] Speaker 1: that's so weird that the grandpa comes up with a dog leash story but there's no dog leash fun in the house that's so weird questions we have hey david privati is 27 years old now in fact he'll turn 28 in november i think it's like november 10th or something if i remember correctly from the testimony from detective eric short yeah judge oh cooper's mom said i agree verdict today interesting minnie said oh i think he did it mary said in my opinion i think we'll have a verdict today is that so can it be like when our trial day ends meaning you know the miguel saguero olivarez trial so we could just like teleport to a birdie that'll be great aloha volicana thank you for the two coffees for the mods sir we are so ready just trying to hear what's going on that's why i went back oh well then we'll just wait or to make her for a lawyer woman hey i'm sorry listen judge okay so we are live everybody ready you know we're live right live live okay let me make a time stamp for this [00:41:25] Speaker 4: jury see you draw thank you sir let the record reflect that the jury has entered the courtroom [00:41:35] Speaker 5: hi jurors [00:41:38] Speaker 4: ladies and gentlemen all of the evidence has been presented it is now time for the final arguments of the lawyers at the conclusion of these arguments i will instruct you on the law in this case and then you will be taken to the jury room to begin your deliberations the final arguments of the lawyers are not evidence but are given to assist you in evaluating the evidence the lawyers are permitted in their final statements to argue to characterize the evidence and to attempt to persuade you to a particular verdict it is improper for a lawyer in a final argument become abusive to inject personal experiences to express a personal belief as to the truth or falsity of the evidence or to make arguments on the basis of matters outside the record except for matters concerning which the court may take judicial notice a lawyer may however on the basis of the lawyer's analysis of the evidence argue any position or conclusion with respect to a matter in issue if in the course of making a final argument a lawyer attempts to restate a portion of the evidence and your recollection of the evidence differs from that of the lawyer you are in recalling and remembering the evidence to be guided exclusively by your own recollection of the evidence now at this time we will hear the closing arguments from the state mr smith you may proceed permission to move about [00:43:00] Speaker 2: the courtroom you may thank you [00:43:07] Speaker 1: permission to move about the courtroom i like the way that was phrased yes the state's going first sometimes in north carolina i think the defense goes first because the judge offered them that at the end of day seven okay state's going [00:43:30] Speaker ?: we began this journey together approximately two weeks ago [00:43:41] Speaker 2: and we began that journey by talking about the function of the jury what is your function we talked a little bit about how you perform your function we talked a little bit about the law now we're going to talk and remind you what your function is your function as we discussed and as the judge will instruct you is to listen to the evidence and we thank you for sitting here for the last two two and a half weeks thank you on behalf of the state and we thank you for on behalf of peyton fields as you listen to the evidence and as you go back into the deliberation room you're to determine the facts you're to judge the credibility of witnesses and i'll remind you you can choose to believe all none or some [00:44:51] Speaker 1: of what a witness tells you sir you're making me feel like i'm in trouble am i in trouble it's a very serious case it's a murder of a child and alleged essay of a child right alleged murder and essay of a child okay very serious and he's very serious and he's handling it through the respect but i'm like oh i feel like i'm in trouble now a little bit [00:45:15] Speaker 2: we spoke about direct and circumstantial evidence and i will remind you direct evidence is testimony from a witness that has direct knowledge of a particular fact but circumstantial evidence and we spend a lot of time on this is a proof of a chain of facts leading to the guilt or innocent of that defendant we spoke about this when you're analyzing facts when you're judging the credibility of witnesses you must not do it in a vacuum you must analyze facts and credibility of a witness against all other believable facts in the case you must analyze against all the other believable evidence in the case and we went through some of the examples of that if you remember the rain analogy and we talked about um if you see someone walk in and you have one fact and it could be a possibility of something then we added more facts to it and that possibility the first time or the first possibility kind of went away because as you looked at all the facts you were able to come up with a different conclusion possibilities versus reasonable you're applauded all you're to applaud the law as the judge instructs you you're to render a verdict and you're not to be influenced by any potential sentence that's your function that's your function analyze the the facts against all the other believable evidence apply the law that we're about to go over render a verdict according i'm going to remind you of the burden of proof the burden of proof the state is only required to present evidence that fully satisfies and entirely convinces you of the defendant's guilt that's the burden of proof it's not required to prove the state is not required to prove beyond all doubt and i told you this that you're going to have some doubt but is it beyond a reasonable doubt we're not required to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt there's no such thing as shadow of a doubt is the doubt based on reason and common sense is the doubt based upon reason and common sense a reasonable doubt is not vain and it's not fanciful doubt hold us to our burden but don't hold us to more than our burden so let's go through the law and you'll get a copy of the judge's instructions and it will it will talk about the law and the instructions but you're going to decide two charges the first one being statutory sexual offense of a child by an adult and we talked about that in our criminal law there are elements and we must prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt each element so for statutory sexual offense there's only three elements the defendant engaged in sexual act with the alleged victim our courts have said a sexual act means any penetration however slight by an object into the genital or anal opening of a person's body state v lucas our supreme court in 302 nc 342 says this for a sexual act by penetration any object encompasses human body parts including fingers second we have to prove that the victim peyton fields was a child under the age of 13 years lastly the defendant was at least 18 years of age there's only three elements there's only three when we talk about penetration our supreme court in state v johnson and our court of appeals in state v bellamy have said that in the context and in the context of rape cases evidence that the defendant entered the labia is sufficient to prove the element of penetration and the court of appeals in state v belamy went further and said we find no reason to establish a different standard for sexual offense penetration of the lady so let's go back defendant engaged in sexual act with an alleged victim sexual act means any penetration of the labia however slight by an object into the genital or anal opening of patent fields any object encompasses any object including human body parts the second charge that you're going to consider is first degree murder and we discussed there are two ways to prove first degree murder the first is by premeditation deliberation the second is felony murder we'll take these one at a time [00:50:56] Speaker 1: how are you going to approve premeditation from earbuds i don't know man i don't know man oh dear a state oh dear okay you may find the defendant guilty of [00:51:10] Speaker 2: murder either based on malice premeditation deliberation we'll start there there's five elements defended intentionally with malice killed the victim with a deadly weapon defendants act act was approximate cause of the victim's death the defendant intended to kill the victim the defendant acted after premeditation and the defendant acted after deliberation so let's take each one separately malice means this and the judge will instruct you on this malice means feel will hate or spite it also means a condition of mind which prompts a person to take the life of another intentionally or to intentionally inflict serious bodily harm which approximately results in death without just cause excuse or justification malice the condition of mind that prompts a person to take a ligature wrap it around the five-year-old's neck and squeeze until she dies that's malice but that's not what happened [00:52:24] Speaker 1: there's ligature marks okay but patent was put back on the couch she she died days later from me from then the medical examiner's belief strangulation but like sir okay [00:52:45] Speaker 2: premeditation premeditation means you formed some intent over some period of time however short before yet we talked about this in jury selection some would say well i need it's a plan you don't have to go into a particular situation with a plan before you form premeditation it can be over some period of time however short i would contend that when you wrap a ligature around a five-year-old's neck you've begun your premeditation i would contend as you squeeze for minutes you're continuing to form your premeditation i would contend you lay a little girl back on the sofa whether you knew she was dead or not she continued to suffer but as you're doing it as you're squeezing as the ligature is being placed around her neck as you're cutting off blood flow you're forming an intent to kill over some period of time however short deliberation you have to act within a cool state of mind intent to kill was formed with a fixed purpose again we go back to it it's not sudden some suddenly aroused violent passion there was a conscious decision to place a ligature around the top year old neck and squeeze and you've heard from multiple experts that said we believe it wasn't just squeeze it was squeeze release and squeeze due to the amount of petechia or petechia in her face her eyes her gums her scalp everywhere above the ligature mark fixed purpose so how do you prove it paton isn't here to tell you how it happened paton isn't here to tell you how it felt paton can't tell you with her own voice what was said before and during you must look at circumstantial evidence look at the lack of provocation by the victim a five-year-old a five-year-old what provocation is there for a five-year-old to place a ligature around her neck and squeeze until she's dead conduct of the defendant before during and after the killing and we'll get to this later when we talk about the defendant use of grossly excessive force you placed a ligature around a little girl's neck and you squeezed for minutes and experts would say you let go and you squeeze for minutes is that grossly excessive first of all placing a ligature around a little girl's neck and squeezing is grossly excessive but sitting there and releasing and doing it again absolutely it's grossly excessive brutal or vicious circumstances that killing what's more brutal than squeezing the life out of a child manner and means by which the killing was done it takes some thought to reach over and grab a ligature take some thought release and squeeze so if we go back and look at premeditation and deliberation do we have malice yes do we have proximate cause we didn't get into that you've heard three experts talk about what caused her death do we have someone intending to kill the victim what's the other reason for placing a ligature around somebody's neck and squeezing cutting off the blood flow what's the premeditation no matter how short and was it done with fixed purpose the answer is yes to every one of those the question you're going to have to answer was it the defendant and we'll get to that for those five elements peyton fields was intentionally killed by strangulation the question we'll have to answer is was it the defendant so the second way we can prove this is under the felony murder rule and if you remember we spoke about this in jury selection that during the course of a dangerous felony you kill somebody and we use the the example of a robbery but let's look at this case there's three elements defendant committed statutory sex offense of a child by an adult that while committing the felony the defendant killed the victim with a deadly weapon the defendants act was a proximate cause for the victim's death again proximate cause not an issue you've heard from three experts payton was killed by strangulation from a ligature she was killed with a deadly weapon the ligature is there any question that she was sexually assaulted not a bit you heard from a critical care doctor who said his nurse said doc there's something wrong he looks down says something wrong he calls same nurses two of them actually one of them and another one came they both saw her injuries they walked you through the pictures we have hemorrhaging within the labia past the labia we have injuries we have hemorrhage on the three o'clock we have hemorrhage on the five to seven o'clock we have the hemorrhage on the eleven o'clock we have a laceration to the clitoral hood we have anal lacerations is there any question that payton fields was sexually assaulted the answer is no again the question you're going to have to answer was it the defendant therefore if you find sexual assault you find that she was killed by strangulation guilty of felony murder now you may be asking yourself what was the the killing done before the sexual assault or after the sexual assault doesn't matter doesn't matter we don't have to prove the timing of it what our courts say is if the killing is part of a series of incidents that form one continuous transaction it is immaterial whether the felony occurred prior to or immediately after the killing says our state supreme court and state bewildness the temporal order meaning the timing of the order of the killing and the felony is immaterial where there's a continuous transaction and it's immaterial whether the intent to commit the felony was formed before or after the killing provided that the felony and the killing are aspects of a single transaction you've heard from our same nurses that was an acute injury wasn't healing it didn't happen days before they are seeing these lacerations and hemorrhages or hemorrhages on peyton fields hours after she was brought to pender er do not get caught up in the timing of it we do not have to prove to you the timing of it so let's talk that's the law you'll get a copy of it walk through it so let's look at our case because the question is going to be who did it november 12th to november 13th 2017 we know at 104 blackwater drive there were five individuals in a house five individuals in a house lisa hunt dale hunt savannah fields peyton fields david prevat only five people inside the house one of them's dead we know that the door was locked we know nobody could have broken in there there are no signs of forced entry you can see pictures of the door you know there's two pit bulls in you know that nobody broke into that house nobody broke into that house so this isn't someone coming from the outside to the inside there are five individuals in the house one is dead and somebody inside that house did so let's look at the timeline this timeline is based upon testimony that you've heard in the evening hours the defendant was outside smoking weed with friends goes riding around with melissa brown so at some time in the early evening david prevat is outside the house we know while he is outside the house there are four individuals inside the house lisa hunt dale hunt savannah and payton we've heard from lisa there was nothing wrong with payton at that time while david is outside there's nothing wrong she's sick she's been feeling ill you know a couple of days before that you've you've heard her testify to that you've heard the doctor say yeah there's some good uh congestion there she had pneumonia the question is when did the pneumonia come about but you heard from savannah and from lisa payton was sick but she was fine she had no ligature marks she was conscious so david's outside you've heard from everyone that was outside with him jamie sykes melissa brown michael hall we were outside we never went inside we never went inside we were hanging out with david on the outside but what were they doing or they were outside smoking weed both jamie sykes says that but melissa brown says that we know david comes back in at some point but before he does dale goes to bed you heard from dale you've heard from lisa he goes to bed why does he go to bed so early because he wakes up in the early morning hours to go work at the pig farm so he goes to bed sometime between eight and nine there's no distress in the house none whatsoever payton is fine she is sick but she is fine lisa will tell you that while david was outside she dale hunt and peyton fields are laying in the bed in their bedroom peyton fields falls asleep dale's asleep she says that she hears a knock at the door lets david in sometime between 10 and 11. some 10 10 10 30 some 11 but sometime between 10 and 11 she lets david in david goes with his dog into his bedroom that he was sleeping in which was the girl's old room that northeast bedroom she called it the front bedroom we know which one it is it's the closest one to the living room he goes in there with his dog and closes the door she takes payton puts her on the couch where savannah is already at she goes back to bed with dale so now we have david in the house we have savannah and peyton in the house sleeping on the couch we have dale and lisa sleeping in their bedroom door is locked dogs are in fast forward sometime in the middle of the night early morning savannah wakes up undisputed savannah wakes up undisputed savannah sees something wrong with peyton her eyes undisputed undisputed she is so concerned in the middle of the night she goes not to david's room to say hey something's wrong with peyton she goes into papa and nana's room to say something was wrong with peyton and when she does you've heard her testify right here when i go in papa and nana are asleep [01:08:05] Speaker ?: papa and nana are asleep [01:08:10] Speaker 2: she says something is wrong with peyton dale says to her get your butt back in a minute don't wake up your sister go back in the bed lisa says i did not hear that you know why lisa didn't hear because she was asleep but you've heard her also say this i woke up when dale goes to the bathroom so savannah walks in they're both in the bed she says something's wrong with peyton get your butt back in the bed says dale he gets up he goes to the bathroom that wakes up lisa they're both awake in the bedroom lisa says tvs roll out well you heard savannah say i went back in they told me to go back into the living room and i turned on the tv lisa says then she gets up here's the tv says she checks on it sometime between 3 and 3 15. when she comes in she sees peyton and all hell breaks loose she screams for dale she screams for david she's urinating something is wrong she's in distress david comes out he grabs her david and dale go to pender county memorial they arrive at 3 42 at the front or at the side door lisa while they're on their way she calls 9-1-1 tries to call them a couple of times i think they called her back but she talked to them while they were on their way what else did savannah say well the day her sister died when she was seven years old she said i don't want to talk about it makes me sad two and a half months later january two months later i don't want to talk about it makes me sad something's wrong with payton by the way in that interview in the first interview she says she was purple and something around her neck and in the second interview she says that's what that's what nana told her she also used to use the word seizure does a seven-year-old know what a seizure is maybe maybe not but what did she tell you in 2022 11 years old it was only her and julie osier in that interview room you got to see it you got to see the video she says same thing she said in january i see something wrong with payton with an additional fact of this she sees david standing where payton is laying and i see him walk back to his bedroom and at that point in time when he's back in his bedroom i go and get nana and papa why is the timeline important well if you'll see here if you remember dr stoico says this he believes based upon his training experience and based upon how she presented at the er and what he has seen what he knows about strangulation is this this could not have occurred multiple hours before it couldn't have not based upon her injuries it's not based upon how she's presenting it had to have been the strangulation would have had to been within an hour within an hour of when she presented to er well she was presented at the er at 342 and why do we think that's a true statement well listen to dale listen to lisa they didn't see anything they didn't see any marks around her neck at that time they didn't see fatigue all they saw was a little girl sees it in distress well you've heard from the experts that say this it doesn't come the petechia doesn't show up right away it's just like a bruise right you don't see a bruise right away it takes time well dr mcgrath and his staff at 342 she's run through the door and into the er they see the petechia they see the ligature mark stoico says had to have been an hour before well what's an hour before 342 2 42 2 42 what time does lisa say that she was woken up between 3 and 3 15. what does savannah say when she goes in to wake up nana and papa when she goes in sometime before lisa wakes up 3 3 15 nana and papa were asleep we've got a tight timeline mcgrath and his staff are focused on the strangulation you heard what he testified to i'm trying to save this poor girl's life right on my table i'm trying to get her stabilized enough where i can get her to the critical care unit and dr stoico in wilmington i'm not focused on anything in her genitalia region yes they cleaned her up first of all they took off her panties and they discarded never be able to be collected you know that she was cleaned up she had deprecated and urinated all over herself you knew she was cleaned up they said she she was cleaned up you see the pictures from uh alice earlier she'd been cleaned up there was not defecation she'd been cleaned up she arrives at new hannah bridge remote center 654 so the question is this how do we go from this that's peyton fields approximately three years old how do we go from this [01:16:12] Speaker 1: they're not showing the public those pictures they didn't throughout the trial i'm just going because of the testimony that went along with pictures and before they started closing arguments you know the judge was like is there something we can't show the media yes shame this poor jury [01:16:26] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. [01:17:26] Speaker 5: Are you speeding it up for us until they talk again? No point us watching just the side profile here. OK. Sir. There we go. There we go. This. [01:18:20] Speaker ?: There we go. [01:18:32] Speaker 5: Oh, the technology shame. There we go. [01:18:40] Speaker ?: There we go. There we go. There we go. There we go. [01:18:48] Speaker 5: Oh, dear. Well, that sucks during closing arguments to not be able to play what you want to play. [01:19:10] Speaker ?: There we go. There we go. There we go. [01:19:36] Speaker 5: There we go. There we go. OK. We all have that. [01:19:42] Speaker 1: Stefan said, "Is he waiting for an epiphany?" Oh, dear. [01:19:48] Speaker ?: Oh, dear. [01:19:49] Speaker 1: G. Bear 55 said, "Wish I had time to watch this trial." I don't think he did it, but again, I haven't had the privilege to watch most of this. I've made summaries for you if it helps. Summaries of the evidence. [01:20:07] Speaker 2: How did Peyton Fields go from this to that? From this to that. From this to that. From this to that. From this to that. [01:20:33] Speaker ?: From this to that. From this to that. [01:20:53] Speaker 1: Remember, David Pratt faces first-degree murder, that's the first charge, and the other one is a S offense of a child by an adult, still facing those two counts. [01:21:27] Speaker 2: The defense would want you to believe this, based on their opening statements, how she went from a healthy little girl to one that had been sexually assaulted, but fatually and anally, and strangled to death. They want you to believe that A, somebody else did it. Now they harped a lot in their opening and in their cross-examination for this. What about the dog leash? What about a collar? What about Savannah? Witness, after witness, after witness, said there was no dog leash found, there was no collar found, there were three dogs in there, there was none found. Not at all. [01:22:27] Speaker 1: Then why did Grandpa say that Savannah was using a dog leash that night and was punished for it? Do tell. Do tell. [01:22:35] Speaker 2: Okay, sorry. Since 2017 have you been presented any dog leash or a collar? No. Since 2017 have you been presented a leash or a collar? So they want you to believe a seven-year-old little girl in the middle of the night put a dog leash or a dog collar around her sister's neck and choke her. [01:23:16] Speaker 1: Again, sir, that's based on her grandfather's testimony during cross-examination. It's not defense theory. Grandpa said it. Grandpa said Savannah was punished that night, she was seven years all the time, Peyton was five, because she'd been dragging Peyton around with a dog leash. She had a dog leash around her neck and was dragging around. That's what Grandpa said. Not a defense theory, not something made up. So the fact that there were no dog leashes found is friggin' weird. Right? Like, why insert that story then, Grandpa? What was that all about? Hmm? I just have questions. Okay. [01:24:00] Speaker 6: It's strange. [01:24:01] Speaker 2: And I assume that you're also saying that she sexually assaulted her sister. [01:24:14] Speaker 6: That's what they want you to believe. [01:24:15] Speaker 2: That's what they want you to believe. The claim to a seven-year-old. You got to see what that seven-year-old looked like on November 15, 2017. Do you believe? Do you believe that she had the motor skills? The strength? [01:24:29] Speaker ?: The demeanor? The demeanor? The character? Throw any other adjective in there. [01:24:32] Speaker 2: Do you believe that she choked and sexually assaulted her own sister? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where is the proof? There is no dog leash, no collar. [01:24:46] Speaker ?: You know why? Because of the demeanor. [01:24:48] Speaker 2: Then ask Grandpa. [01:24:49] Speaker 1: Grandpa, and I'm not blaming Grandpa, I'm putting on my defense hat for a moment and saying, But Grandpa said the story and Grandpa said the girl slept in his bed sometime. Okay? Maybe Grandpa needs to be asked a lot more questions. I'm just saying, right? He came up with the dog leash thing. Okay? The jury will remember this. It's a red herring. [01:25:21] Speaker 2: It didn't happen. You heard Dale and Lisa's interviews on the morning of, and in the afternoon of the 13th. Did they mention a dog collar? Did they mention a leash? Did they even mention they believed that Savannah did this? Of course not, because they know they didn't. They know she didn't do it. But the defense would like to think she did. It's a red herring. Don't call for it. [01:25:57] Speaker 1: I'm going to just say it one more time. Sir? Mr. Prosecutor? It wasn't the defense that provided a red herring. It was Grandpa. The other male in the house. The jury's going to think about this. [01:26:09] Speaker 2: They also said, "We don't believe Sam." Whatever she says, don't believe her. She's been coached. Was she coached on the 15th of November 2017? Makes me sad. I don't want to talk about it. I'm very sorry to interrupt. I'm just going to, again, the counter argument to that is that Savannah didn't talk about David being near the couch until much later, like her third interview. [01:26:38] Speaker ?: So in the first two, she says, "It makes me sad. [01:26:38] Speaker 2: I don't want to talk about it." [01:26:39] Speaker ?: And she's seven years old. [01:26:40] Speaker 2: She was sad that her sister was in the hospital and then died. [01:26:41] Speaker ?: You know what I mean? [01:26:41] Speaker 2: Sir, Mr. Prosecutor. [01:26:42] Speaker 1: Oh dear. I mean, what did they have in this case? They said, "It makes me sad. It makes me sad. I don't want to talk about it." I'm just going to, again, the counter argument to that is that Savannah didn't talk about David being near the couch until much later, like her third interview. So in the first two, if she says, "It makes me sad. I don't want to talk about it." And she's seven years old. She was sad that her sister was in the hospital and then died. You know what I mean? Sir, Mr. Prosecutor. Oh dear. I mean, what did they have in this case? The earbuds? Savannah's testimony? That medical examiners say that Payton was strangled? They were ligatomark, petechia, all that? Okay. And that there was some sort of sexual assault? Okay. Very little DNA though. No semen and all that. Mm-hmm. What else do they have? [01:27:28] Speaker ?: Earbuds? [01:27:29] Speaker 1: Savannah? The opportunity. Five people in the house. Okay. [01:27:36] Speaker 2: Was she coached? Inside with Julie Osher? The only two of them in there? You saw the interview? Was she coached? Why didn't you say something earlier, Savannah? I don't know. I was seven. I don't know. I was seven. Fast forward five years. Savannah comes in here and she testified in front of you. Not only does she testify in front of you, she's less than 50 feet from the defendant. Nobody who they say coached her was in this courtroom. You get to judge the credibility of a witness. Many of you said, here's how I judge the credibility of a witness. Do I make an eye contact? Do I fidget? Do I tell the same story consistently? Do I fidget? Do I tell the same story consistently? Do I fidget? Do I fidget? [01:28:44] Speaker ?: Do I tell the same story consistently? [01:28:47] Speaker 2: What she's told you is this. I was asleep. I wake up for unknown reason. And I see that defendant standing over my sister. I see him go back to his bedroom. I go to Nana and Papa's and I try to wake him up. Get on back in there. Don't wake your sister up. Turn on TV. It's Savannah's incredible to you. If she was coached, do you think maybe she would have said, I saw David do it? She would have said, or not said, I don't remember on some things. You got to hear her testimony. You got to hear her on cross-examination. She's 16 years old now. She was 11 when she first said it. Did she seem coached? Coach, was it consistent? The answer is yes. [01:30:17] Speaker 6: But what supports Savannah's statement? Because there's other things. It's just not Savannah's statement. What supports her statement? Her whole statement. [01:30:30] Speaker 2: Well, Lisa and Dale supported her statement. She came in there. She says something's wrong with Peyton. I told him to get out. Or I told her to go back to bed. She goes in and turns on the TV. That's what she says. Lisa and Dale confirm every bit of that. They confirm every bit of it. Peyton's condition confirms it. So what confirms that David was standing over there? Again, are you going to analyze the facts in a vacuum? Or are you going to analyze them against all other believable evidence? I'm going to ask you to analyze them against all other believable evidence. Connect the dots. Put the puzzle pieces in. [01:31:12] Speaker ?: The defense will say this. [01:31:18] Speaker 2: There's no DNA in the vagina. [01:31:21] Speaker ?: That isn't. [01:31:23] Speaker 2: It's not accurate. In the clitoral hood, there is male DNA. Albeit a small, small, small amount of male DNA. One that two analysts could not amplify. There's male DNA. That's the number one thing that supports Savannah's statement. And why is it so small? I'm using a reason and common sense. [01:31:56] Speaker ?: She had been cleaned. [01:31:57] Speaker 2: Pender County did not know that she had been sexually assaulted. They're going in trying to save her life from a strangulation which was obvious to them. And they go and clean her. And now there's no DNA in vaginal swabs, vaginal smears, anal swabs, anal smears, peri-anal swabs. But you know what? If it's not in place, it's a little bit difficult to clean completely in the clitoral hood. There's folds in the clitoral hood. There's a small amount of male DNA. It doesn't point to who, but it doesn't point to a male. Because you know what? There should be zero male DNA in a five-year-old's clitoral hood. Zero. And there's .0002. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:32:57] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:32:57] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:32:58] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:05] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:11] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:12] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:26] Speaker 1: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:32] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:38] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. [01:33:39] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitoral hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:33:48] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:33:52] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:33:55] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:33:56] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:33:57] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:33:58] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:04] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:05] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:12] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:13] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:24] Speaker 1: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:31] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:32] Speaker 1: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:40] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:34:54] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:04] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:05] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:09] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:10] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:12] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:13] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:16] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:18] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:25] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:27] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:29] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:30] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:56] Speaker ?: Male DNA in a clitor hood. [01:35:57] Speaker 2: Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Male DNA in a clitor hood. Vince doesn't even believe Dale did this. He had him on cross-examination. He at least on cross-examination. They could have questioned him three ways from Sunday. Where were you at? How did you? What time did you go to bed? Did you get up anything? Did you do this? Did you do that? They didn't question him. Not one bit about it. You know why? Because they don't believe he did it. You know why? Because they're blaming the seven-year-old. If they don't believe Dale did it, you should not believe Dale did it. It's that simple. Plus, where's the other evidence against Dale? Where's the other evidence? We'll get to it in a minute. [01:36:54] Speaker 1: Sir, we've got another trial to be at. Could you, I'm just kidding. We'll get to the other trial when we're done with this. But like opening statement was like 10 minutes for the state. And I don't know, like 20 minutes for the defense. They were short. The opening statements were so short. This is, this is long. Okay. I'm glad they're going over everything, but don't you worry. After the closing arguments here, we're going to teleport to our live trial day. Okay. Hopefully it'll be perfect timing. [01:37:19] Speaker 2: We've already talked about Savannah did with dog leash refuted. Stranger broke in refuted. So let's get to the heart of the matter. Why did David do it? Analyze every fact, not in a vacuum, but against all the other believable evidence. What did Dr. Stoico say about the extent of Peyton's injuries? She was strangled. She was strangled. She would have been fighting. [01:37:53] Speaker ?: She was strangled. [01:37:54] Speaker 2: She would have been fighting. Even for a five year old, she would have been fighting. It's not even a conscious decision, is what he said. You just react. When you're being choked, you're going to fight. You're going to thrash. If you can make noise, you're going to make noise. So was this done on a couch with the sister right there? Was this done in a bedroom with Lisa and Dale? Or was it done somewhere in secret? We've heard from some experts, and you can use your reason and common sense. Think somebody's going to sexually assault and strangle somebody in front of others? So who had the opportunity? David. He was the only one sleeping in that room that night. It must have occurred within an hour of arriving at Pender. So somewhere between 2:42 and 3 o'clock. We're starting to see that Savannah is becoming more credible. How time does she go and get Dale and Lisa? Sometime right before 3:15. [01:39:20] Speaker ?: Why? [01:39:21] Speaker 2: Because Lisa says I did not hear her come in. Dale wakes me up. When he goes to the bathroom, I hear the TV. I come in there about 3:15. Savannah saw the defendant standing over Peyton. Saw him wearing blue shorts, maybe something black. [01:39:55] Speaker 5: No, he's going to whip out the shorts. [01:39:58] Speaker ?: Look at the judge. [01:40:00] Speaker 5: Look at the judge. [01:40:04] Speaker ?: So I'm wearing blue shorts. [01:40:20] Speaker 2: And maybe black. [01:40:21] Speaker ?: I saw him wearing blue shorts. And maybe something black. What color are these shorts? These boxers. Blue and black. We know he's wearing them. They're inside the pants that everybody says he slept in that night. [01:40:21] Speaker 2: That were urinated on. [01:40:22] Speaker ?: They were wearing black. We know he's wearing them. They're inside the pants that everybody says he slept in that night. [01:40:24] Speaker 2: That were urinated on. [01:40:25] Speaker ?: They were. He drops drawers right there. Pants. And these boxers. And these boxers. They're inside the pants that everybody says he slept in that night. That were urinated on. They were. He drops drawers right there. [01:40:29] Speaker 2: Pants. And these boxers. [01:40:31] Speaker ?: And these boxers. And they're inside the pants that everybody says he slept in that night. [01:40:32] Speaker 2: That were urinated on. They were. He drops drawers right there. Pants. And these boxers. And Savannah says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:40:38] Speaker ?: And possibly black. [01:40:39] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:40:40] Speaker ?: And possibly black. [01:40:40] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And possibly black. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And possibly black. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And possibly black. [01:40:47] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:40:48] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:01] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:28] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:30] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:31] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:36] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:37] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:49] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:50] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:54] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:41:55] Speaker 2: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:42:04] Speaker ?: And he says, I see him wearing something blue. [01:42:05] Speaker 2: All right, what supports that? Well, Lisa's own statement. Lisa's own statement. And if you remember, Lisa testifying, she says this. I put Savannah down. Or Savannah is sleeping dead here, foot here. She had even marked. Dead foot. She says, I put Peyton here, feet down there. So they're head to head at the corner of the L. But when I go in there around 3:15 and find her in distress, she is sitting up. Peyton is standing here or sitting here with her head here and feet here. Her condition. Could she move? She couldn't move? So how did she get from a sitting position or a laying position to a seated position where she had been strangled almost to death at that point? And if reason and common sense says she wasn't assaulted there, she was assaulted somewhere in secret. Then how did she get sitting up? [01:43:28] Speaker ?: Savannah tells you. [01:43:29] Speaker 2: Savannah tells you. I see Uncle Boo Boo standing over Peyton. I would contend to you that she was not assaulted on that couch. She was assaulted in that bedroom. And when Savannah wakes up to see Uncle Boo Boo standing over Peyton, he's putting her back. But he doesn't put her back the way that Lisa put her, which was laying down. He puts her back in a seated position. And we start to see Savannah's credibility. She was coached. She's got alcohol, fetal syndrome at 11. You saw her at 16. What cooperates Savannah's statement? Well, Lisa, because State's Exhibit 24 is Lisa's marked-up couch photograph. State's Exhibit 34 is Savannah's marked-up diagram of the couch. It's the same as Lisa's. State's Exhibit 87. Savannah's marked-up couch picture when she was 11 years old in 2022 explaining what she saw. 22 leases last week or the week before. Savannah, is there evidence to cooperate with Savannah? You're seeing it. You're seeing it. [01:45:45] Speaker ?: It's starting to unfold. What points to the defendant? Well, we know it's a male. Why do we know it's a male? [01:45:45] Speaker 2: Why do we know it's a male? [01:45:46] Speaker ?: Because you've got a small amount of male DNA in the clitoral hood. It is not Lisa. It is not Savannah. It is not Lisa. It is not Savannah. What points to the defendant? Well, we know it's a male. Why do we know it's a male? Because you've got a small amount of male DNA in the clitoral hood. It is not Lisa. It is not Savannah. Well, it doesn't point to David. Okay. But it points to a male. It is not Lisa. It is not Savannah. Well, it doesn't point to David. Okay. But it points to a male. It is not Lisa. It is not Savannah. Well, it doesn't point to David. Okay. But it points to a male. Two same nurses observed injuries to her vagina, anus and bruising outside of her genitalia. That's why she was sexually sexually assaulted. [01:46:04] Speaker 2: That's the evidence. [01:46:05] Speaker ?: That's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:05] Speaker 2: That's why she was sexually assaulted. That's why she was sexually assaulted. That's why she was sexually assaulted. That's why she was sexually assaulted. That's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:16] Speaker ?: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:17] Speaker 2: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:20] Speaker ?: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:21] Speaker 2: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:24] Speaker ?: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:26] Speaker 2: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:38] Speaker ?: And that's why she was sexually assaulted. [01:46:39] Speaker 2: Dr. Kelly confirmed the vaginal injuries days later. Meaning they were starting to heal. You heard her testify to that. You heard her testify to the anal injuries. There's no medical intervention. You heard from every medical personnel that touched Peyton at Pender Memorial before the same nurses. Thermometers didn't cause it. Catherers didn't cause it. What other DNA evidence did you hear? Outside of the clitoral hood, you heard one other piece of DNA evidence. They took a penal swab of David on the 14th. You heard his discussion regarding that. Did you have sex with Haley Fawcett? Yeah. She's on her period. That's why you see blood on my penis. But what else is there? And it confirms that. DNA testing confirms that. David is assumed. Haley is the major contributor. But then there's a third contributor. While it doesn't point to a particular person, you can make influences from the evidence. There's a third contributor. You've heard no other evidence that he was sexually involved with anybody else. I would contend that you can infer that that was Peyton's DNA. You can infer that. Well, it was from the urine. Well, you've heard urine is not a good conductor of DNA. Could be. But you know what else could be? Either blood or skin cells when he was assaulting her. He was assaulting her. You can infer that. So what else cooperates Savannah? What else points to David? The red earbuds. Not orange, but red. Red earbuds. Let's first look at the red earbuds. Again. [01:49:35] Speaker 5: Throw it to us. The deadly weapon. [01:49:37] Speaker ?: Red earbuds. Where were these red earbuds found? Right next to David's bed. Right next to David's bed. Right next to David's bed. They apparently didn't test the parts that go in or on your ears here. Only the cord. [01:49:40] Speaker 2: The deadly weapon. Red earbuds. Where were these red earbuds found? Right next to David's bed. Right next to David's bed. [01:50:00] Speaker 1: They apparently didn't test the parts that go in or on your ears here. Only the cord. Which the defense is like okay well if you could have tested this it could have proven that Payton used it sometimes. Which is why DNA is on it. Alright okay. [01:50:17] Speaker 2: Well there were other ligatures found in here David's bed. Yeah. There were. David's DNA are on these. Well David's DNA was on another one. Yeah. Payton's DNA is on this. Payton's DNA is not on any other ligature or possible ligature. What do we know about them physically? They're 52 inches long. A single strand is .115 of an inch which is a little less than 3/16 of an inch. If they're doubled up they're a little bit less than a quarter of an inch. A distinct. A distinctive characteristic that no other ligature in that. That was found. Readily found in that house. Contains. Hooks. Hooks. What else can be observed about this? Well there's a 14 inch or approximately 14 inch section that has been stretched. Two knots in it. [01:51:24] Speaker ?: Two knots in it. Splits at some point. [01:51:26] Speaker 2: So why is this important? You know why it's important. You know why it's important. You know why it's important. [01:51:40] Speaker ?: You know why it's important. [01:51:40] Speaker 2: You know why it's important. [01:51:46] Speaker ?: Thank you. [01:52:16] Speaker 1: It was apparently on recross, Luther Brett established that she swabbed the cord, not the earbuds themselves. So that's what I was saying to you. Who answered me there? A virtual tourist. DNA analyst Shane Wilcox later said David Provatt and Payton were included as contributors on that swab because they circled what they had actually tested. Anyway, so they should have tested every single, every single part of that if they think that that's the deadly weapon, right? [01:53:01] Speaker 2: You know why these are important. Not only are they important because they were found next to David's bed, readily available, but they're important because Dr. Kelly testified that they matched strike that part, consistent with the size of the ligature mark around Payton's neck. If you remember what she says, the area between this line and this line is about a quarter of an inch. A quarter of an inch. A quarter of an inch. Use your reasoning common sense about how big a quarter of an inch is. That's a little less than. First of all, don't fall for the red herring. It was a belt. How many belts do you know that are a quarter of an inch? If you believe there's a quarter of an inch. If you believe there's a quarter of an inch belt or less, there are certain parts of the ligature mark that's three sixteenths. Dr. Kelly also opined that there was a split on the side of her neck right here where it was sliding. Whatever the ligature split into two sections. Well, you've got this split. Or you could have a split like that. We don't have to prove to you the exact manner that these ear buds were wrapped around her neck. We do not. We have to prove to you a deadly weapon was used to kill Payton Fields. A ligature. The only person that can opine how these were wrapped around Payton's neck is Payton and the defendant. [01:54:58] Speaker ?: The only person that can opine how these were wrapped around Payton's neck is Payton and the defendant. [01:55:16] Speaker 2: Well, Dr. Kelly, they match in size, but so are these other ligatures. So are the TR-10 cable, the Radio Shack cable, the other phone charger, the 550 cord bracelet that was found outside. Well, Mr. Smith, it's because there's a distinctive pattern that shows on her neck. That's consistent with these headphones. I would contend. You can see it. This is not an enhanced video or picture. That is a picture from the autopsy table. You can see something interrupted the ligature that had a hook pattern. It's very distinctive. The only ligature that was found readily available with that distinctive pattern was found right next to David's bed. With Payton's DNA on it. And David's DNA on it. What about Savannah's testimony? Does that support Savannah's testimony? [01:56:38] Speaker ?: Absolutely. [01:56:38] Speaker 2: I saw David standing over Payton, going back to his bedroom. This is also a picture from 1120-1116 that Detective Leatherwick told me. You can see the distinctive pattern there, too. It's the same pattern. It hasn't been enhanced. It's not shadowing. It's not seeing ghosts where ghosts don't appear. [01:57:13] Speaker ?: You can see it. [01:57:14] Speaker 2: Go to the next one. Also from a different angle. [01:57:18] Speaker ?: There it is. Next photograph. 8:15. On the morning she arrives at the Pender Memorial and New Hanover Regional. Detective Leatherwood's hand showing the ligature mark at 8:15 in the morning. And there it is. [01:57:18] Speaker 2: angle. There it is. Next photograph. 8.15 on the morning she arrives at the Pender Memorial in New Hanover Regional. Detective Leavenwood's hand showing the literature mark at 8.15 in the morning and there it is. I want you to see this photograph. And when they talk about, well, it's 14 inches that are stretched. Peyton is 5 years old. Look how big her neck is. It's tiny. That is one finger. Look how tiny her neck is. Well, that's not enough. That's not enough for her neck. Use your reasoning and common sense. Next photograph. Here's a different photograph from the hospital. One hand. Two hand. Three hand. This is the right side of her neck. There's been some opining from Dr. Stoico. You heard a lay opinion from Eric Stoico. They're neck short. There's bruising right there. And I want you to see this photograph for what it is. Look how big her neck is compared to those hands. The neck is tiny. Tiny. Tiny compared to this. Well, these would break if you used it as a ligature. Remember what Dr. Kelly says? You only need one to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. Thirty to cut off the wind or cut off the air in the windpipe. More for the arteries but one to two pounds for the veins. They're stretching. one to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. one to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. One to two pounds of pressure on the jugular vein. I want you to focus on this. When Lisa finds Peyton on the couch and she screams, "Dale, David." Well, Dale comes out in his pajamas. David comes out fully clothed. Isn't that weird? Isn't that weird? Savannah says a seam in blue shorts can tend his boxers, but he comes out fully clothed. Why? Why? Because he knew something was wrong. [02:01:51] Speaker 1: That is weird, yeah. [02:01:52] Speaker 2: Why? Because he caused it. We played two hospital videos, three hospital videos, but look at the second. When they were in -- there's two videos of them in the blog. Look at his demeanor. Everybody else believed Peyton was having seizures. You heard from Lisa when she'd been sick. I gave her Domitaba. I gave her children's Tylenol or Ibuprofen. Everybody there believed she was sick. That these were seizures from being sick. And look at their demeanor while in the lobby. Look at Lisa and Dale's. Look at Savannah's. Nothing out of the ordinary. But then look at David's demeanor. Who was panicked or appeared to be panicked in the lobby? Let me watch those two clips. You can ask to look at any evidence you want to look at. But look at -- look at his demeanor. You can look at his actions before, during, and after. Look at his demeanor. You know why he was so distressed? Because he knew what he did. He knew what he did. And he knew the extent of her injuries. He knew that she wasn't sick. He knew that he'd wrap something around her neck. Look at what else. On the night -- the night of the 13th. The night of the 13th. The night of the 13th. As he's looking distressed inside that lobby. The night of the 13th. He goes and has sex with Haley. While she's on her period. Okay. Nothing wrong with having sex while you're on her period. But you remember what Detective LaBelle said? When he appears during the day of the 13th. David's fingernails were nasty. David's fingernails were nasty. Then he comes back the next day on the 14th. The morning of or the afternoon after he has sex with Haley Fawcett. What did Detective LaBelle say? [02:04:23] Speaker ?: Detective LaBelle said this. [02:04:25] Speaker 2: It looked like his fingers had been manicured. Now should they have gotten his finger scrapings the day before? [02:04:32] Speaker ?: Absolutely. [02:04:33] Speaker 2: But they got him the next day. They come back single sourcing. Of course they did. [02:04:40] Speaker ?: He cut them. And they were clean. [02:04:44] Speaker 2: So he cleaned his fingernails. He cleaned his fingernails. But he didn't clean his penis. Well how do you know he didn't clean his penis? Well there's blood on it. And there's a third DNA profile. What does that tell you? It tells you he was worried about these. [02:05:07] Speaker ?: He was worried about these. [02:05:09] Speaker 2: And you know he's worried about these because later on he's searching Google search in DNA. Google search in a promising tape. [02:05:26] Speaker 1: Well you allege that he was searching it because it was on Haley's phone but okay. [02:05:30] Speaker 2: Remember sexual offense penetration of any object into the genital or anal opening of a victim. And clued fingers. What are the injuries? Laceration to the clitoral foot. You've heard from same nurses. These can cause damage. And I would contend they did. Both to her anus. And to her vagina. And he knew. Because he cut them. He cuts these. But he doesn't wash himself. [02:06:07] Speaker ?: Why not? [02:06:08] Speaker 2: Why didn't he wash his? Because he knew that he had blood on his penis. He knew that. Maybe they'd find his DNA on there. [02:06:21] Speaker ?: Mask it. [02:06:22] Speaker 2: Hide it. And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." [02:06:25] Speaker ?: And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." [02:06:25] Speaker 2: And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." And he said, "I'm not going to be able to do it." There's a whole box of evidence that went testing. Five sources here. Four sources there. Three sources there. All of it. Inconclusive. Or most of it, inconclusive. Too complex. Why? Because there's so many DNA profiles and alleles and everything else in there. You can't decide. You can't figure out what's happening. Well, guess what? You couldn't on the third profile either. So you cut these. You leave your penis unwashed. Because you were worried. Because you were worried. Now, finally. What else happened? [02:07:17] Speaker 6: What else happened? [02:07:19] Speaker 2: Did he stay at 104 Blackwater Drone? No. He immediately moves out. Goes and lives somewhere else. Consciousness of guilt. His actions. Each one of these actions is a consciousness of guilt. Each action after Peyton is found is a consciousness of guilt. There's only two people that knows what happened to Peyton. Peyton. And she can't testify. [02:07:54] Speaker ?: And David. [02:07:56] Speaker 2: So let's wrap it up. Some would say, well, there's not a lot of evidence against David. [02:08:05] Speaker ?: And a vacuum. [02:08:07] Speaker 2: And a vacuum. If you're looking at each piece in a vacuum. [02:08:11] Speaker ?: Maybe. [02:08:12] Speaker 2: But you're going to be instructed. Maybe against all the other people who are facts. And if you take everything together. You take the fact that he was smoking marijuana. The fact that he was staying in a room. The fact that she was assaulted in secret. The fact that she was sexually assaulted. And we have no DNA. The fact that Savannah says I see Uncle Boo Boo standing over Peyton. They believe she was coached. I would say look at all the other evidence that cooperates what she says. Every piece of this evidence cooperates what she says. You're going to be asked at the end of this. You're going to go back in the deliberation room. You're going to look at the law. You're going to be looking at the law. And you're going to have to render a verdict. Determine the facts. Apply the law. Render a verdict. The judge is going to give you a verdict sheet. He's going to give you a verdict sheet. Two verdict sheets to be exact. He's going to say this. We the jury return a unanimous verdict that the defendant David Cravat is. Either this. Guilty of first degree murder. You got to answer yes or no. What does the evidence tell you? What does the totality of the evidence tell you? The totality of the evidence says this. Nobody else did it. Lisa and Dale were in there together. They haven't wavered from that. They were in there together. You've got the physical evidence that links David. You've got the eyewitness testimony that links David. You've got David's own actions linking David. There's no other evidence to suggest anybody else did this. No other evidence. When the judge instructs you to go back and render your verdict on the verdict sheet as to first degree murder, the answer should be yes. Now you're going to have to decide then under the theory of premeditation and deliberation. Or under felony murder. [02:10:35] Speaker ?: Or both. And you've got to make that decision. And I would suggest to you it's both premeditation and deliberation. And felony murder. Then he's going to give you a second sheet. And the second sheet's going to say, we the jury, as our unanimous verdict that the defendant David provided as to the charge of statutory sexual offense of a child by an adult, guilty or not guilty. [02:10:36] Speaker 2: Guilty. Guilty. [02:10:38] Speaker ?: Guilty. [02:10:39] Speaker 2: There is no other evidence that anybody else did this. Guilty. Guilty. [02:10:42] Speaker ?: There is no other evidence that anybody else did this. [02:10:42] Speaker 2: He had the opportunity. He had the opportunity. And you've got to make that decision. And you've got to make that decision. And I would suggest to you it's both premeditation and deliberation. And felony murder. Then he's going to give you a second sheet. And the second sheet's going to say, we the jury, as our unanimous verdict that the defendant David provided as to the charge of statutory sexual offense of a child by an adult, guilty or not guilty. [02:11:02] Speaker ?: Guilty. [02:11:03] Speaker 2: There is no other evidence that anybody else did this. He had the opportunity. He had the location. There's male DNA. There's a ligature that is consistent. And not just consistent, it matches or is consistent with the pattern, the special pattern of that hook. You mean the injuries? Find him guilty of sexual offense. Find him guilty of murder. And only after you do that, will there be justice. Thank you. [02:11:47] Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Smith. [02:11:48] Speaker 1: My goodness, that was almost 90 minutes. That's not what I thought would happen. And please don't panic everybody who's watching the Faith Hedgepeth case with me. We're going to go to that trial day right after this. Now it's just up to how long will the defense take. We're first going to watch closings. Then we're going to go over there. Okay. But damn. I mean the state's opening was like 10 minutes. I didn't think this would be 90 minutes. Even though sometimes closings can be longer. This was a very long. My goodness. All right. [02:12:20] Speaker 4: Members of the jury, we're going to go ahead and take our mid morning break. Go ahead and close up your notebooks. Remember. No, sir. [02:12:27] Speaker 1: No, sir. No. We have another trial to be at. No, sir. We want to stay here for now because we have to. We were three minutes behind. And therefore, hopefully it's a 15 minute break, right? [02:12:42] Speaker 4: Do not discuss this case amongst yourselves. You have not yet received my final instructions. So you are not allowed to deliberate or discuss this case while you were in the jury room. Do not discuss this case with anybody else. Do not have any contact with any of the parties, attorneys or witnesses. Do not post online on any social media sites. And do not conduct any independent investigation or inquiry. So we'll go ahead and excuse you for about 15 minutes. [02:13:07] Speaker 7: Mr. Your Honor, make sure you leave your clothes, your clothes, your chairs, and any partners invite this one. [02:13:13] Speaker 1: Now, Mr. Defense Attorney, sir, less is more, okay? Just say, like, you know, are you going to be able to convict a guy to send him away for life based on red earphones? Red earphones? Huh? Based on? And then just go over it. Just go over and then be like, fine. I'm not guilty. And then walk away, sir. You could do it. Don't take an hour and a half. Please don't take an hour and a half. Here's the defendant, by the way. Punk Gopher said the letter, the more time you have to skip the fluff. For those following the Miguel Salguero-Olivaris trial with me. The judge takes a 90 minute lunch and two breaks in the day. So there's two hours and they start at half past nine Eastern. So we're good. We're still good. I'll just keep shifting that time. Right? Anyway. So we're going to watch the defense's closing arguments when they come back. As in, they're taking a little break now. And then we're going to go to that trial day. It's a full day. Okay? Sorry mods. Poor mods. You guys, please spoil the mods. Help me spoil the mods. I spoil them too, but help me spoil them. Okay? Because I make them work very hard. My bad. Just when they think it's a, it's a full trial day. Everybody's wrecked. I'm like, yay. Guess what? Let's do this as well. Sorry about that. And the defender's still smiling. Dude. How many is facing? [02:14:50] Speaker 4: Thank you, sir. Let the record replace. [02:14:52] Speaker 1: First degree murder charges is what he's facing. Damn. Okay. And a S offence of a child by an adult. I wouldn't be rocking and smiling so much. Okay. [02:15:05] Speaker 4: The jury's exit. The courtroom will be at ease for the next 15 minutes. [02:15:08] Speaker 3: Call be at ease for 15 minutes. [02:15:23] Speaker 1: Forward. We go. Forward. We go. I actually want to show you. Stefan said that was a long closing for little evidence. Yeah. A lot of peacocking here. Strutting around. You. We'll find him. Like, sir. I don't know if they will. I don't know if they will. Will they? Sure. The poor jury. Um, let me show you this quickly. Hold on. Let me do this. I'll keep monitoring this. Cause we've got like 10 minutes ish. And then we'll watch the defense closing. And then we're going to go to a full trial day. Yes. Cause it was day seven that I summarized for you earlier. And I didn't get to show you all the horrible things the judge said, but why the judge dismissed the one count, right? Okay. Is. Over here. The timestamp is what now? [02:16:09] Speaker ?: My little book. [02:16:10] Speaker 1: Hello. Oh dear. [02:16:12] Speaker ?: Little book. [02:16:13] Speaker 1: Just give me the timestamp again. And I think it was like six. Oh. Four ish. Somewhere here. Wait. Six. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. [02:16:23] Speaker ?: Yeah. [02:16:24] Speaker 4: yeah yeah yeah yeah okay yeah all right with regard to defendants motion to dismiss the state is alleging three charges the first being first degree murder the second statutory rape of a child by an adult and the third statutory sexual offense of a child by an adult with regard to the defense's motion to dismiss as to counts one and three that motion is denied the court believes that there has been substantial evidence presented to the jury of those two charges such that the question can be presented to the jury with regard to the second count statutory rape of a child by an adult the state needs to establish substantial evidence of two things first that the state proves each essential element to the crime and that the defendant was perpetrator of that crime the court considers all the evidence in the light most favorable to the state and draws all reasonable inferences any contradictions or discrepancies must be resolved by the jury charge of statutory rape has three elements first that the defendant engaged in vaginal intercourse with the victim vaginal intercourse is penetration however slight of the female sex organ by the male sex organ second that at the time of the alleged acts the alleged acts the alleged victim was a child under the age of 13 years and third the time of the acts alleged the defendant was at least 18 years of age this statutory rape charge differs significantly from the statutory sex offense by an adult of a child by an adult in that the state does not need to prove that the male sex organ entered into the female sex organ rather the state needs only prove that any penetration however slight by an object into the genital or anal opening of a person's body gives the state a lot more leeway as to establishing that particular offense and for the record both offenses are listed as class b1 felonies they are listed as the same type of felony offense the state has shown that peyton fields received trauma to her vagina clinical hood and rectum however the only evidence to indicate that perhaps mr provat's penis entered peyton's vagina is a third component of unknown inconclusive amount of dna whether that third dna portion is female or otherwise cannot be said without any other evidence to link the second necessary element the jury would merely engage in a guessing game therefore i do not find that substantial evidence has been established with regard to the statutory rape offense and i grant the defense's motion to dismiss and note the state's objection to my ruling thank you thank you [02:19:49] Speaker 1: i don't see that often here with the defense uh request you know to dismiss charges and then something actually gets dismissed count two was dismissed okay so yeah the defense asked for all of them to be dismissed of course right patricia poppy says more evidence than caleb and squat peterson no way caleb flynn so much evidence oh my word yeah no this one this this one evidence is a little bit thin very very very circumstantial doesn't mean that they will lose the case it's just definitely a tricky one challenging for the jury i think right especially for everyone to agree on a unanimous verdict i think that could be tricky but we shall see right [02:20:35] Speaker 4: okay so that's what the judge said all right mr brit yes do you wish to present any evidence no sir we do not okay with regard to your clients giving any sort of testimony have you had a conversation with your client about whether he would testify or not yes or multiple and he indicated that he would not testify [02:20:58] Speaker 1: that's correct all right mr brevet if you can please stand okay i'm going to speak back with mr brevet you [02:21:05] Speaker 4: understand that you have a constitutional right to remain silent you understand that right and you understand that that constitutional right remains with you throughout this trial and do you understand that if you wish to exercise your right to remain silent i would instruct the jury that they could not use that silence against you yes sir and do you understand that you also have the right to testify if you wanted to testify you understand that yes sir and that you could give up your right to remain silent and that you could take the stand and testify if you wanted to understand and that whether to testify or not testify are choices that you and you alone can make do you understand that yes sir now your attorney has indicated that you do not wish to testify is that accurate yes i did [02:21:54] Speaker 5: not wish to because he did pretty good okay all right so i don't see that again i don't wish to [02:21:59] Speaker 1: because he did pretty good and then they wait for the jury to come in wait also [02:22:05] Speaker 4: remember not to discuss this case amongst yourselves do not discuss this [02:22:16] Speaker 1: we're in the jury all right we're re-watching part of day seven [02:22:29] Speaker 4: thank you sir let the record reflect that the jury has re-entered to the courtroom mr brit the state has arrested do you wish to present any evidence no sir defense arrests yes all right thank you members of the jury all of the evidence has all right members of the jury and that's that now let [02:22:45] Speaker 1: me quickly also uh i'll just leave that banner up there what was he charged with in the past does he have a criminal record so it was on march 25th of 2018 remember this alleged crime was committed while payton was rushed to hospital november 13th of 2017 okay on march 25th of 2018 this defendant was charged with breaking and larceny after breaking and entering he broke into a neighbor's house stole a laptop and pawned it then around april of 2018 pause thank you jules for spoiling the mods with five trial coffees okay april 7th to 8th of 2018 he was accused or charged with burning a building that was under construction after an argument with an ex-girlfriend he set fire to a camper trailer that was being refurbished as a home on little kelly road okay so we've got breaking and entering larceny arson and then april 28th of 2018 he was charged with intimidating a witness and communicating threats while already in the pender county jail on the above charges he called his mother lisa hunt and threatened the lead detective on payton's case sergeant john leatherwood on the recorded call he said that leatherwood got it coming to him leatherwood is coming to an end and i've been in here plotting can the jury hear that that's interesting as well oh okay so yeah irene said shame the jury can't hear about his past let me now update the banner and say like this and if you missed the beginning of the stream i gave you a recap of day seven a summary of day seven right okay now what did i miss something there was something i wanted to say what was it i don't remember all right let me bring the feedback up shall we excuse me thank you day seven you can see yourself back now let's bring our current day back up because they should be back soon like this and they're on a break and we wait for the defense's closing arguments then we'll teleport to the next trial which we are watching gavel to gavel day five abby lane said he should be in prison anyway from the sounds of his past record right so i don't know how he went from that to allegedly suddenly essaying a child and murdering her damn it's interesting though at least the state also pointed out that he moved out immediately after i mean he had already moved out but then he had this fight with his girlfriend and then he moved back in temporarily oh man i'm going to say it again aren't i because i keep visualizing and he moves back in and they put the little girls on the couch and he's in the room no no no no put him put him unwashed him on the couch right and little girls in the room if he did what they say he did it wouldn't have helped the situation he would have gone in the room but still why would you kick two little girls out of the house that tells me a lot about him too actually just everybody sorry but everybody in the house not very protective of those little girls huh elena bornilla about said uh gee i love watching without breaks thanks thank you so much i really appreciate your two you're a super sticker oh yeah let me also thank let me just see who it was quickly it was lisa brown thank you for your 50 swiss rank paypal gift thank you so much okay uh sir wait oh my bad my bad sorry i'm like there's no sound it was me it was me i turned off the sound here we go all right sir strut it and tell us what you got [02:27:21] Speaker 4: thank you sir let the record reflect that the jury has ran to the courtroom mr brick you may proceed with your closing argument may it please court council [02:27:32] Speaker 7: ladies and gentlemen of the jury david pervatt did not rape did not sexually assault and did not murder mr smith told you you have two verdict forms that you will receive he showed them to you is david pervatt guilty of first degree statutory sex offense is david pervatt guilty of first degree murder when we started this case there were three charges three first degree statutory rape that is no longer for your consideration statutory rape or rape of any kind requires proof proof that a man inserted his penis penetrated into a woman's vagina much of this evidence that you've heard suggest suggest that peyton fields was raped what is it that supports that there was semen under the her clitoral hood semen doesn't get there [02:29:02] Speaker 4: members of the jury you are to consider the facts as you recall or remember them based on your own recollection of the evidence [02:29:12] Speaker 1: but what i know there wasn't semen there was no semen male dna 0.0002 wait 0.00 i think zero two what's the unit they use but no no semen [02:29:25] Speaker 8: there was testimony that there was semen under her clitoral hood objection facts not in evidence [02:29:33] Speaker 1: yeah sir don't say semen unless he's trying to say that maybe he's doing like a reverse psychology like there was semen oh no there wasn't maybe he's gonna do that shame okay let him finish the sentence [02:29:47] Speaker 7: it's sustained sustained there was seen there was it was suggested that there was semen there wasn't objection facts not in evidence there was no semen found in her vagina very good yet mr smith argued a moment ago that dale's semen was found in her vaginal area [02:30:22] Speaker 1: okay okay what is this defense attorney doing sir now you're saying dale's what is happening this is not even gaslighting it's just wrong wrong information what what is going on sir did you did you follow the case okay [02:30:45] Speaker 7: that there was male dna found in her vagina there you go but it could not be identified he also argued it shouldn't be there and with that i agree but that doesn't mean that david pervatt is the person who perpetrated these crimes each of you said during jury selection that you recognize that defendants right and privilege be presumed innocent each of you said that you could apply that that principle that right that privilege to david pervatt and that privilege that cloak of innocence stays with him throughout this trial until and unless the state can take it away from him and based upon this evidence they have not done that based upon the testimony of witnesses they have not done that what happened on the morning of november 13th 2017 2017 you have a glimpse you have in your window you have speculation in the state as to what happened but do you really have the facts facts you have to determine the facts from this evidence it's not something you get to guess about it's not something you get to speculate about it's something that you have to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that happened peyton fields was taken to the hospital here in burghall taken by her uncle who held her who tried to save her life because he had seen that she was struggling to breathe he was trying to give her mouth to mouth for grandfather dale hunt driving as fast as that little car could go to get them there because they believed they could get to the hospital faster than an ambulance could get to them at 104 black water drive and then back to the hospital and when asked how far the distance was he said probably 15 miles well how long did it take you to get there eight or nine minutes eight or nine minutes without stopping and what did you see in the first video you saw a strong young man with a young girl in his arms banging on the door of the emergency room so he could get in he got out of the car holding her clutching her and runs to the door he goes in and he immediately tells them they need help he turns her over to the nurses and the doctors and yes he was crying yes he was distraught why because his niece was on the verge of dying she was on the verge of leaving everything that she had and they want to say that's consciousness of guilt no that's pure emotion that's concern for pain it's not oh i've done something horrible so i've got to act like this he went down and he sat down with the registration like hand in his hands talking to her after talking to her he goes and he sits down again he is still emotional no one knows he doesn't know what's happened to payton and if they're if he did where's their evidence david doesn't have to come into this courtroom and prove he did not do this simply because he is charged does not mean he did this he does not have to present evidence he does not have to take the sheriff's department evidence he doesn't have to bring it to the da why because he's presumed to be innocent they have to go out and find it they have to bring it in here to prove what they believe happened and when you don't get the evidence you don't prove your case and that is what has happened in this very trial that you've sat in for the last two weeks there's a lot of stuff they try to hang their hat on detective leatherwood the original investigating officer who did he focus on who did he focus on dale hunt no but david prevat david prevat david who yesterday detective short who took over this investigation said that there were multiple statements made during the course of this investigation by david two members of law enforcement did the state choose to use those no why because they're not evidence they're not evidence that helps them prove their case but detective leatherwood and being detective short he can detective short can sit up here and say no i didn't make up my mind about what happened or who did it it's the same report that detective leatherwood put together who else does it point to no one what other evidence did detective short go out and gather to try to prove that david prevat did this and he sent stuff for the lab oh these weren't tested this wasn't tested this was a test this was a test oh let me photoshop a a picture to see if these hooks on these red earphones look like the hook on her neck and then what does he do he sends emails to dr kelly how many years after this how many years after this is alleged to have happened oh could this have been the ligature could this have been the ligature and dr kelly's response what is it that you want me to do what is it you want me to say if you say that it could be or is consistent with then i can charge you look at these you've examined these you've seen the picture i'm not going to put on the gloves but when mr smith stood up here and doubled them and so if you double it it's the same size it's less than a quarter of an inch well let me ask you this ladies and gentlemen what didn't they say what didn't they say because when you look at that picture there's a j here and there's one over here so if you double it how do the two hooks end up imprinted on her neck how that's for them to explain to him short tried to do it yesterday and said oh if you take it and you double it and the person could have pushed back from front to back well the problem with that argument is there are marks on the back of her neck that are consistent with the marks on the front of her neck which means the cord had to be wrapped and if the cord is wrapped once twice there's still more than enough that both that the hooks are going to be in either one end in one hand or the other so how did this happen they have to tell you that they have to prove that is david's dna on there yes because they're his is paten's dna on there yes because it was there in the house and she could play with it it's balled up it's balled up it's balled up found on top of a nightstand on a bedside table do you really believe that david pervath used these earbuds to choke to strangle to kill pecan fields why is it sitting in a spot that's so easily detected mr smith said oh the defense said this was about a dog leash how many dogs are in this house three how many of you own dogs dogs i don't know of a single solitary person that owns a dog does not have a dog leash and you have three different sized dogs one small one medium and one larger what was it that lisa hunt said about why savannah was in trouble that day [02:42:02] Speaker 1: oh sir did you watch the trial sir dale said it dale said it dale said it okay [02:42:13] Speaker 7: because savannah and peyton played a game where savannah wrapped the dog leash around peyton's neck and lisa had called her and taken it away mr smith said well why didn't they bring the dog leash in what why it's not our job it's not our job to present their case why didn't detective lee the crime scene man why didn't he find it why didn't he find a lot of things that were discovered on other trips part of the condition of the house there's no dispute about that but lisa hunt had told them had told them about savannah and peyton and the dog leash objection facts not an evidence [02:43:17] Speaker 4: members of the jury recalling and remembering the evidence you can be guided exclusively by your own recollection of the evidence [02:43:26] Speaker 7: did they believe her did they think it was worth pursuing apparently not why because that changed detective leatherwood's theory that it was dated the theory that from november the 13th of 2017 until february of 2021 22 when he was arrested the day that provide had to live with that cloud over his head that the pender county sheriff's department believed he had committed murder but yet they hadn't arrested him why because they didn't have the evidence they had these why do you think savannah was interviewed three times more importantly why was savannah interviewed two days two days on the very day that payton died why was savannah interviewed at that point [02:44:41] Speaker 1: because she was the one who sold page okay that's a very obvious answer right is this rhetorical okay [02:44:46] Speaker 7: don't you think that was a little premature what did they really expect to get if savannah had witnessed what happened put her through that trauma again so soon but they interviewed attempted to interview her and what did she say i don't want to talk about it because it makes me sad was there any evidence that she knew that payton had died at that point no was that she didn't want to talk about it not only because it made her sad but perhaps [02:45:31] Speaker 1: savannah savannah her her sister and when they brought her back in january oh boy okay oh that's where you're going well sir if you're going there you definitely got to get your facts straight and so far a lot have been wrong [02:45:47] Speaker 7: very of 2018 again can you tell me about hey i don't want to talk about it makes me it makes me sad i don't want to talk about that because i don't want to talk about that i don't want to talk about that but when they brought her back four years later detective short said yesterday so key i wanted to have an interview with savannah at the carol cell clinic one more time before we made the arrest it didn't happen because he said it had to be canceled because savannah had code and what did he do what did detective short do he calls the lady with whom savannah has lived her aunt from shortly after this occurred through today to tell her that they were going to arrest david where where was norah was norah in this courtroom during the sex case did anybody did anybody point her out to you she even called as a witness she wasn't here they didn't call her as a witness why maybe it's perhaps norah who was telling savannah what had happened during this period from november of 2017 to when they wanted to they decided they would arrest david norah as detective short said the only family member who ever inquired about the status of the investigation [02:47:58] Speaker 1: uh okay i feel like he probably lost the jury i don't know but uh yeah okay maybe the verdict watch won't take too long after all what the hell is this sir oh my word [02:48:12] Speaker 7: norah who brought savannah to this very courtroom why so they could practice practice what savannah was going to say from this witness stand and norah who said savannah said was here ends up in the back room with detective short why perhaps norah was more involved in this practice session than they want you to know so when she goes back to that interview after david has been arrested don't you know she's been told that payton was killed by david [02:49:05] Speaker 1: norah is savannah's paternal aunt she went to live with her i think she still lives with her now so the defense is accusing the aunt of coaching savannah to protect savannah because the defense thinks savannah did this wow and then you got all the dna all messed up when you started sir what is happening [02:49:34] Speaker 7: and so when that interview starts the forensic interviewer says oh it's been a long time since we've talked you've been here before and what is it that payton says because the first time the first time she talks to payton excuse me savannah the first time she tells her story she tells her story about a little boy and a little girl who are outside they're playing little boy picks up a rock and he throws it out of the house and he breaks a window and when the lady comes out of the house she immediately asked the little boy did you throw that rock little boy said no she did and so when she asked the little girl she says i didn't throw the rock he did he's telling you a story that's in november on november 15th 2017 in january of 2018 when she's brought back the same interviewer starts telling savannah that story and savannah cuts her off and she says yes i know what happened you told me that they were playing the little boy through the rock at the house and broke the window the lady accused him of doing it he said no the little girl and the little girl said no he had done it she remembered that she remembered that but when she comes back even later in 2021 2022 she starts to tell the story and savannah doesn't remember it she doesn't say oh you told me that before and each time will you tell me about painting except on the last time she doesn't ask her will you tell you what happened to painting can we talk about that said oh you've been here before and before she can even ask a question savannah responds and states i saw uncle boo boo he was standing by the couch beside peyton and then he walked to his room when asked why she woke up did you hear anything no do the dogs bark no did you need to go to the bathroom no i woke up i woke up and that's when i saw uncle boo he says she says oh he was wearing some blue blue shorts let me ask you this td wasn't on it where's the light that's coming into that room she says the light in the kitchen was on the light was stove when you turn the stove light on above your cooktop area it's designed to shine down not out she was that stove was in the kitchen that from the living room is covered by two walls and the doorway is to the right of the front door as you step into the entryway into that house and which walls it on they showed you the picture would the stove have been shining light been shining out in the direction of the doorway no it wasn't use your own common sense your own experiences how bright are those lights really is it enough to illuminate the living room where they are basically in this back corner is it enough for her to see tv's not on there's no other light on in that room i'll submit to you now and if she actually did see david why didn't she say something like are you okay what's going on hang on with that boo boo why are you [02:54:27] Speaker 1: she was seven oh my word sit down sir please sit down oh my goodness [02:54:32] Speaker 7: she doesn't she says that at some point she goes into her grandparents room to say hey something's wrong with savannah her eyes are twitching her eyes are rolling back in her head how did she see that she didn't say she got up and he walked over to where savannah was excuse me she wanted to look down on her as she was on the sofa she's saying she's in the same position she was in when she says david was there the opposite end of the sofa and if it's dark how is she seeing her eyes twitch her eyes rolling back in her head she says she gets up and she goes into the bedroom and she says something's wrong with savannah with peyton she's acting funny savannah savannah savannah says peyton is acting funny dale wakes up if he was asleep but dale says go back to bed and so she does she goes back to the sofa she turns on the tv she says she sits there she says anything else about what peyton was doing no she's not acting funny she doesn't say anything about her eyes rolling back in her head that she's twitching she's shaking her arms are moving no dale gets up and goes to the restroom does savannah say that no lisa who was in bed says dale gets back in bed so she was awake but that's not when she gets up she told you she got up between four and five o'clock to go make coffee because dale had to leave to go to work to be at work by five o'clock that's why she woke up she didn't go get up because dale said something to her oh savannah says peyton's acting funny you want to go check on it no nothing is said to lisa about peyton supposedly acting funny in the living room what lisa said was the television was really loud when she got up she went in she turned it down and when she went in there she sees peyton there's much more light in there at that point and she and she screams screams and calls for dale and david was the door to david's room opened or closed ultimate to you was close because smoky was sleeping in the room today excuse me part of closing the door was to keep the dog in there but savannah says all three dogs were on the sofa when she woke up how smokey go from being in david's bedroom to be on the sofa when she wakes up he doesn't and she screams is it out of unusual that david would come in and gone to bed is still clothed no stay says oh he he he put his pants on before he came out he got out there before dale did and david does what david david takes paper from his mama because he can see the distress she's under and he's trying to help the elk comes out in his pajamas it's closed he sleeps in goes back and gets dressed and then they go to the hospital [02:59:08] Speaker 1: are we there yet sir are we there yet this could take a while um so i'm saying in chat here i thought closings would be done by the time we have to start our trial day i wish i had a crystal ball clearly not but you know what the silver lining is we're gonna spend more time together today because we have a full trial day to cover after this which is almost a full trial day what is happening sir we don't need the whole story all over again but okay [02:59:34] Speaker 7: we're waiting and at the hospital the doctor comes out and he says what you have a very sick child a very sick child a child that he recognized and saw who had pneumonia from having and had vomit to vomited and he had gone down a windpipe into her lungs he doesn't say at that point she's been sexually assaulted but they're going to transfer her from pender to new hanover because new hanover has a higher degree of care than pender they have a nico he's going to blame the medical staff huh for the injuries [03:00:25] Speaker 1: right i mean he's blaming a seven-year-old for the other stuff okay now the injuries he's going to blame the medical staff let's hear [03:00:33] Speaker 7: neonatal intensive care nursery or unit specifically designed for children and payton didn't transfer stop the transport starts after six o'clock in the morning he's in the er at pender for almost two hours now in his examination the doctor sees evidence that he believes she has been sexually assaulted so he calls for the same nurses the same nurses come in and they tell you they go through the same their regimen they're examining her and they say that they can see semen under the clitoral hood all right [03:01:28] Speaker 4: members of the jury we're going to take a little bit of a break go ahead and close up your notebooks [03:01:34] Speaker 1: oh crap we're going to be all day aren't we oh my word you keep saying semen sir you have a whole career behind you right you you heard it wasn't semen it was male dna you heard the amount no okay if you exit the courtroom you have to discuss this case amongst yourselves the defense is uh losing the case for his client there yeah i think he probably regrets not testifying now i'm not going to testify because he did a pretty good job or i should i think he should have [03:02:17] Speaker 4: thanks sir let the record reflect with the jury's excellent report mr smith [03:02:21] Speaker 2: judge as you know i'm keep objecting because he is referring to semen there is no facts and evidence to suggest that anybody saw semen there's no lab report there's nothing we've we have not even referred to semen so i'm asking that mr brett refrain from mischaracterizing the evidence judge mr brett [03:02:42] Speaker 7: anything you wish to say my recollection testimony was there's been no semen my wood [03:02:53] Speaker 1: you wouldn't say that with your whole chest that's so embarrassing my recollection is that there was semen they were oh oh my word now when people speculate that maybe somebody could went on appeal on you know ineffective assistance of counsel i'm like why do people do that every single trial every single time it's kind of annoying because that's not how it works but in this case wow is it gonna go that way [03:03:18] Speaker 4: because what the hell is this whoa absolutely none that has been presented or accepted into evidence there's been evidence of male dna under the control hood but there's been no semen that has been detected on payton all right thank you so no mention of semen anymore from this point onward let's bring [03:03:38] Speaker 1: the jury back in right here that's wild that is yeah now you're not smiling and rocking your chair and looking at the camera are you defending now you're worried now he's really worried he's like oh my word why does he not know that i think even he would know that right this is so wild okay i mean he wants to say semen when there was none i will give a but then you're still going to blame a seven-year-old for the crime like okay i know the two could be separate things entirely but like [03:04:24] Speaker 4: what an instruction to the jury regarding the the fact that there has not been anything presented in evidence as far as semen thank you hmm worried now are we on patent fields all right mr britt you may continue thank you i could reflect that the jury has ran to the courtroom members of the jury after a review of the evidence and just for clarification there has been no semen that has been detected on patent fields all right mr britt you may continue thank you [03:05:31] Speaker 1: are you embarrassed now sir you should be [03:05:44] Speaker 7: states exhibits 13 and 21 sexual assault kits one that's marked as 13 with item 11 in the inventory of evidence other ones marked as item 16 in the in the inventory of the evidence i have 13 contents of this box as they were when it was semen for items that were swabbed with patent fields they did vaginal swabs they did the inside of the vagina they did outside the vagina they did the perineal area between the vagina and the angus and they swabbed the angus in the ring [03:06:31] Speaker 1: they created stains no one wants you to talk about that anymore because you don't even know the evidence sir donna aldrey said we've had some very shocking trials decade i know right i love watching trials with all of you thank you so much donna for your support [03:06:50] Speaker 7: why because the nurses believed that she had been sexually assaulted the results from the lab and swabbing those items were that the vaginal swabs did not contain c when they were sent to bode bode tested a different part of the swab because the part that was tested in the lab had been cut off because they were taking it from another area but all they could tell you with bode was there was a small amount of semen objection approach [03:07:47] Speaker 1: what is wrong with him i mean seriously yeah really ineffective assistance of council i'm going to do that too now um let's say there there's a new poll for you yeah you should be very worried now [03:08:02] Speaker 4: damn it previous instruction when you entered there's no single town on peyton fields literally [03:08:08] Speaker 7: not at all bode testified that they found a small amount of dna male dna not seem so small that couldn't be quantified or amplified to determine if it was male or not okay and also if there's no [03:08:27] Speaker 1: semen on the victim whatsoever mr defense attorney that would be better for your client you could use that but instead you don't you botch it oh my word [03:08:47] Speaker 7: dr kelly during the course of the autopsy said that she examined peyton examined her vaginal area and she saw lacerations but she did not examine her hands she deferred that to the same nurses that they were in a better position to do that than she was this is a forensic pathologist who was trained to determine if there are injuries and the possible causes of injuries but she did not bother to examine this is the most outrageous defense closing argument i've seen [03:09:46] Speaker 1: this is the most outrageous defense closing argument i've seen and he had a lot going for him a lot of people worried about this case including me i was like damn damn okay okay okay no thank you for helping the state with their case this is like the jury no longer wants to hear what you've got to say because you're saying wrong things they heard the evidence they probably took notes they're probably looking at you like what is he doing oh man and say the victim's anus instead of saying her name now pick when to say the victim's name not then oh my word [03:10:37] Speaker 7: this man there's no dna no dna of the day you've passed in any of its laws and that's key that's key why because it leaves open a question that state has to answer state has to answer the who what when and where and how in case they can't answer the fact that david's dna is a part of the sexual assault [03:11:18] Speaker 1: fyi because we're three minutes behind because i chip in i'm going to speed it up to 1.2 [03:11:25] Speaker 7: if he's a perpetrator they now want to argue that it could be a finger it could be an instrument i thought it could be something but they can't point to anything they can't point to his penis they can't point to his fingers so they try to get there with his nails between hands being washed his hands were washed his hands were clean but he hadn't washed himself how many times you come in from work or having done something and the first thing you do is wash your hands it's not it's instinct [03:12:12] Speaker 1: not good logic you got blood on your pee pee you're going to wash it usually okay so this is not good [03:12:17] Speaker 7: logic i don't think so oh my not an issue of oh he asked me about my nails he looked at my nails and i went home and i washed them and cut them make them look nice no his hands were dirty and had they thought at the time that his hands may have contained evidence why then didn't the sheriff's department collect get the scrapings get the dna that they believe was there or could have been there was that just overlooked no no you heard the detective he was the first person to interview david about this case at the hospital and they didn't bother to collect that leaves another question why mr schmidt says oh he had the opportunity where's the authentic where's the motive talk about motive they don't have to prove most david what would have been david's motive to have sexually assaulted and murdered his three-year-old or niece that's a rhetorical question there is no oh he just moved back in two or three days before that's not devoted lisa hunt told you he came home because he and his girlfriend had broken up he lived either sometimes with them sometimes with an aunt and there was no definite time period when he would go from one to the other she was somewhat surprised to see him he didn't she didn't know that they'd broken up so what is his motive for having allegedly done this to painting it's zero [03:14:25] Speaker 8: zero all of this evidence [03:14:33] Speaker 7: that is here the exception of one thing and those are the earbuds dna it's left open we don't know whose it is because they're simply not enough the earbuds ask yourselves this question how did the mark get here and here and here and you know what when you look at that picture that mr smith showed on the television of the mark on this part of her neck i'm sorry less here and then here if those were used as one how do they get separated number two why is there a mark here and mark here and you know what look at the lines from whatever the ligature was it was that and look at the lines on her neck it was the earbud portion portion underneath the wire was on top and if someone was truly choking her with these don't demonstrate don't do that what are the knots and why is one loose and one tight if this was pulled if it was stretched and if it's done like this one half and one half you have a knot on the bottom strand you have a knot on the top and then you have this rectangular shape where is that where are they they're not in those pictures nobody's identified any other mark than these and as much as detective short didn't want to admit it the end that goes in the ear it's what you see on the side of her neck that little hole that shows up why didn't they ask that this part be examined [03:16:59] Speaker 1: well they're definitely not gonna now or you're gonna find yourself in cuffs because you're touching it without gloves sir the strongest evidence they have all right well guess there won't be a retrial if it's a mistrial is that what he's doing now oh my [03:17:16] Speaker 7: no specifically this part he had that opportunity and he chose not to [03:17:32] Speaker 1: don't know what's going on the feed there feet glitching out from the defense closing [03:17:36] Speaker 7: so in the end what you have is the death of a young girl yes she was strangled no one's going to deny that but she also had pneumonia she'd been sick she'd been coughing there was a doctor's appointment police on hunt's testimony was a hospital a doctor's appointment the next day for her to check out she's been running a fever and then go away so if she wasn't as sick as the state wants you to believe why is it necessary that she has an appointment go to the doctor and what you what you're hearing what you hear is that it wasn't giving you back why did this stay why did the sheriff's department fail when they learned that she had aspirated swallowing her vomit why didn't they initially see that in the house why did that have to be pointed out to dale and lisa by dale and lisa it's on the sofa it's on the wall why didn't they just seize the cushions to the couches why didn't they seize the mattress from the room or both rooms because they're two bedrooms at one point state was arguing and questioning those occurred in the third bedroom and now it's the second bedroom but the second bedroom his bedroom that where david slept that was his room but that is where the girls had moved their stuff into while he was living with his aunt it didn't change where's the sheep they made a big deal about showing this this sheet and the dna that's found on the cheese it's hanging the image that the penis image again that's david's but did they say there was any blood any dna from payton on that sheet if that's where it happened was there any dna [03:20:10] Speaker 1: i don't know could you just say hayden i don't want patent savannah dale david could you mix up names as well sir payton's on top of the mattress [03:20:22] Speaker 7: because what you see in the crime scene photographs is that bed did not have any sheets any blanket any type of bedding on it it was just stripped down naked why didn't they seize it why wasn't it tested for blood or other substances that would carry dna and the sheriff's department had plenty of opportunities two search warrants to search the entire house consent searches to search the entire house it's just like the dog leashes that they never looked for because they believed that payton was sexually assaulted on the sofa well then why didn't they take the sofa take the cushions take the coverings off no one said that [03:21:15] Speaker 1: they believed that david took her to the room okay of the sofa [03:21:23] Speaker 7: because they weren't sure they had four opportunities that we know of to do that very thing and they struck out now the pants the underwear the analyst didn't say urine wasn't in the best group of substances that have dna she said it's in a secondary group and she told urine contains dna when they examined david's pants what did they find they found dna on the outside of his pants which was consistent with what you know that she urinated on david she defecated on david she would have been in his lap riding to the hospital and dale said you could smell it when she lost control of her violence there's your cooperation about the substances being on david's pants why didn't they seize them at the hospital if they observed yes they were found in the room yes he stepped out of his pants and his boxers at the same time the dna substance was on the thigh of his pants it was on the fly some of it are to see through into the back side of the zipper area and onto the front of his boxers but if david pervatt had sexually assaulted paper with his penis wouldn't there have been dna material found on the inside of those boxers [03:23:25] Speaker 1: so they dropped count two that was in your favor now it is a s offense of a child by an adult but because there was not sufficient evidence of a penis penetrating to victim they dropped count two so [03:23:40] Speaker 7: what are you doing wow and the answer to that is yes it would have been but there was a none on the inside of this box again the questions are who what when why and how the state has proved while what we in the court [03:24:12] Speaker 1: we're throwing tantrums now okay look at david worried now very very worried yeah why don't you smile at the camera some more you're going down wow unless a mistrial is declared all these mistakes i don't know i don't think it works like that overrule the objection okay i'm just saying whoa look he definitely you're definitely like what the hell is this i know right what the hell is it [03:24:47] Speaker 7: the state has the burden of proof david has none so the state has to present evidence that satisfy this question have you received evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that david prevat is a perpetrator the person who did this he's a perpetrator of these crimes it's not just they have to prove the individual crimes they have to prove it was him him and what does their evidence show their dna evidence that was brought people here from raleigh brought people uh one examiner from charlotte and another one from massachusetts what does it prove what does it show the dna that they were asked to examine was insufficient insufficient to identify david brevat as a perpetrator of these crimes the other thing you have to realize is that some of this stuff was already back from the last from the lab in raleigh when they arrested they did not read the report or do they think by sending somewhere else it's going to get better well they didn't so when a person is charged with a crime it starts from the proposition of is there a probable cause to arrest someone is there evidence that shows a crime was probably committed and it was probably committed by someone [03:26:42] Speaker 1: that's the basis upon which they got yeah pointed him pointed him but when it comes to court [03:26:48] Speaker 7: it goes from probable cause probability to what is called beyond a reasonable doubt that means evidence that fully satisfies you entirely convinces you of david's guilt and what do they hang their hat on for proof beyond a reasonable doubt no more than they did when they charged him because it wasn't conclusive when they charged him it wasn't conclusive in this trial and the difference between probability and beyond a reasonable doubt because it becomes a higher standard it's like comparing this wall in front of your jury box that's to jump over that's problem cause you come over here to the bench where the judge sits and it's a higher that's raised this is proof beyond a reasonable doubt it's not all doubt it's not beyond a shadow of a doubt but it's proof that satisfies you individually and collectively because first you have to determine in your belief in your mind have they proven the things that they are required to prove then collectively the 12 jurors who would liberate us you talk about it you may have differences of opinion that happens part of the judge's instruction will be that you as an individual juror will consider the arguments and positions of your fellow jurors before you finally make up your mind so you can have your opinion about what this shows and other jurors may differ you may change your position and at the same time someone else may change theirs this is not a vote by majority this is a vote that has to be announced each and every one of you have to be satisfied that the state has met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt before you can say that david provide is guilty of any crime it's the same standard applies in every criminal case in north carolina and the united states as part of the makeup of the judicial system [03:29:11] Speaker 8: so when you go to the truth you will have heard the judge's instructions about the law what is it the state has to prove for statutory sex it has what is it the state has to prove for first degree premeditated murder what is it the state has to prove first degree murder under the felony murder if you find that david for that is not guilty of statutory sex events then you will not consider whether he's guilty under the felony murder because it is that felon that they have alleged he committed during the course of time that peyton [03:29:59] Speaker 7: died they don't have to show a specific intent to kill him they don't have to show that it was premeditated they don't have to show under felon murder that it was deliberated they don't have to show that he has as i said a specific intent to kill all they have to do is prove she was sexually assaulted and during the course of that sexual assault she dies whereas under premeditated delivered that didn't happen burger there are multiple [03:30:29] Speaker 8: elements the elements are the parts of the crime delighting ingredients and a recipe [03:30:37] Speaker 7: if you start off making a cake from scratch you're gonna need flour butter eggs baking soda maybe some milk and you're gonna mix it together to make your back your batter but if you leave one of those out [03:30:53] Speaker 1: you don't have the cake that you intend to make oh no we're at the cake kind of we've been there before which trial was that try remember this is this is not a trial we're covering gavel together i'm like this is trial number no no no we're just dipping our toe in this one i'm giving you summaries we watched the opening statements highlights and now we're watching the closing arguments cool cool and the summary videos in between cake who was the guy that you the cake analogy in one of the 32 trials we watched together oh no don't go there that was bad sir sit down your voice is telling you it's time to sit down so they have to every single elf [03:31:36] Speaker 8: under premeditated murder and i would argue to you ladies and gentlemen they haven't done that [03:31:53] Speaker 1: david pervatt is not guilty of these offenses sorry to interrupt you sir the studio did it was paul i think it was matthew paul oh man he has lived with this nightmare since november of 2017 [03:32:09] Speaker 8: a little more than a month away a month and four days actually you're job is to seek the truth from the evidence that's been presented that is the highest aim of every legal contest to find the truth how do you do that you go back through the recollection of the testimony you go back through the evidence that's been presented to you because somewhere in the facts and circumstances of every case the truth abides and when the truth abides [03:32:46] Speaker 7: lady justice guard in her robes swoops in to reveal that truth your job is to find the truth and to render a burden your job isn't to punish david is not to reward the state your job is to let your verdict speak the truth and that truth is that david is not guilty because the state just simply does not have enough evidence to prove that he did [03:33:21] Speaker 4: mr britt ron of applause go ahead and break for lunch go ahead close up your notebooks and then you're out of lunch again very important that you not discuss this case amongst yourselves do not allow anybody else to discuss this case in your presence you do not have any contact with the parties the way that the judge was saying it was going to work [03:33:43] Speaker 1: at the end of day seven was like who's going first i don't know if the state's going to do a rebuttal but we're going to go to our next trial day now i think for now we've heard enough if a verdict comes in wow i think i'll pull an all-nighter at this rate mods just go to sleep not yet later just go to sleep i'll be awake no problem because if a verdict comes in maybe after the trial day we'll see we'll see and then if there was a rebuttal we can watch that right let's just see what happens [03:34:13] Speaker 4: do not conduct any independent investigation or inquiry do not post online on any social media sites we're going to cut lunch a little bit short please return back here by 1 45 and we'll [03:34:24] Speaker 5: start up again at 1 45. what are you starting up right yeah why not do the rebuttal before lunch i [03:34:34] Speaker 1: know this is effing with our timing but we're gonna go now especially because i mean if i'd covered the trial gavel to gavel obviously not but this isn't one after i covered gavel together i covered a summary of day one and two then i made you a video summarizing day three four five and six and now here we are closing arguments which this was not the plan for it to go on this long no this was not the plan but it's okay i like spending time with all of you i'm happy to do it but like what we aren't gonna wait around for lunch now i think if they come back and if there's a rebuttal which i don't know usually there would be wow then jury instructions i think the judge will send them home go home come back tomorrow and deliberate [03:35:30] Speaker 4: yeah david thank you sir let the record reflect that the jury has exited the courtroom we had two bench conferences the first was my admonishment to mr brit that no semen was found by the bode analyst the second was mr smith's objection to mr britt's character characterization of what the state needed to prove the who what where how i overruled that objection we'll be in recess [03:35:50] Speaker 3: until 145. we'll be in recess to 145. say say everybody's trying on for you it sounds like kyle [03:36:00] Speaker 1: kyle's in tennessee by the way the bailiff but the accents are cool eh maybe for you guys you don't hear accents i mean i'm from south africa i live in switzerland so the pions his pions had semen on an objection there was no semen oh what my recollection is that there was wow defense attorney out let me quickly look at the poll what do you think the verdict will be you guys said sixty percent guilty on all counts fourteen percent guilty on one not on the other whichever one that means seven percent said not guilty on all counts and eighteen percent said hung jury oh boy oh boy well did you uh enjoy did you enjoy watching that with me are you so upset that we might miss the rebuttal for now maybe we'll catch up later you know but uh are you upset i'm not upset let's go let's get the heck out of here except we're still going to be north carolina we're going now to the miguel salguero olivares trial luckily if there's any testimony that we're like oh my word can we speed it up yes we can are we going to skip over all breaks hell yes we are today we absolutely are so thank you months thank you everyone uh if in the unlikely event that i don't get to you obviously i'm i'm it's highly unlikely that i'll catch the verdict live because i'll be live with the other trial the one that i'm covering gavel to gavel so but i can cover that at some point whether that's a youtube short a video for you whether we watch it together whatever it ends up being okay in the unlikely event that we don't see it together live whatever you could see it live on trial tv live law and crime court tv and we'll catch catch up when we can right okay are we ready now to teleport let me make sure you guys know where you're going hold on we're going here next here next okay here next and we're going to see whoa challenge accepted let's see if we can catch up see you see you over there bye everyone [03:38:13] Speaker ?: so so so so so so so so so you so you you